Are Complex Demonstratives Synonymous with Definite Descriptions

Bibliographic Data

ID16940962
AuthorsFelipe Amaral, Felipe Vilhena Antunes Amaral (0000-0001-6305-4098, Universidade de Brasília, corresponding author)
Year2014
Volume22
Issue1
Pages7-44
Publication date2014-06-30
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueRevista de Estudos da Linguagem (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0104-0588 • E-ISSN: 2237-2083
PublisherFaculdade de Letras da UFMG (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.17851/2237-2083.22.1.7-44
OpenAlexW1538282897
LanguageEN
References cited13

In this article, I discuss the way in which descriptive material in complex demonstratives contributes to their literal content relative to the context of the utterance. A traditional hypothesis about complex demonstratives in the philosophy of language postulates that the descriptive material ‘F’ in ‘this/that F’ contributes to literal content because an associated definite description containing ‘F’ determines and expresses the literal content of thecomplex demonstrative relative to a context. I claim that this kind of hypothesis is mistaken because no type of definite description,particularly Gödelian descriptions, plays a significant role in the determination of the literal content of complex demonstratives.Instead, I favor an approach according to which the literal content of a complex demonstrative is mainly composed by the non quantificational content of the demonstrative expression (e.g.,‘this’), and by the descriptive content of its nominal (‘F’). Complex demonstratives are thus descriptive designators, that is, terms that refer and describe without quantifying

Content (measure theory) · Context (archaeology) · Demonstrative · Linguistics · Literal (mathematical logic) · Utterance · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · History · Linguistics and Discourse Analysis · Mathematics · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access