What copredication can(not) teach us

Bibliographic Data

ID19219348
AuthorsDavid Liebesman (0000-0002-8879-7004, Department of Philosophy , University of Calgary , 2500 University Dr. NW , Calgary , AB , T2N 1N4 , Canada), Ofra Magidor (University of Oxford and Magdalen College , Magdalen College , Oxford , OX1 4AU , UK)
Year2026
Publication date2026-04-30
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTheoretical Linguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0301-4428 • E-ISSN: 1613-4060
PublisherDe Gruyter (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/tl-2026-2002
OpenAlexW7160051746
LanguageEN
References cited46

Copredication sentences such as ‘Lunch was delicious but took hours’ and ‘The book on the shelf was written by Tolstoy’ can be used to express truths despite ascribing prima facie incompatible properties to single entities. Theorists have drawn far-reaching and dramatic lessons about what copredication can teach us about language. We begin by focusing on the three such central lessons. In each case we argue that the lessons are mistaken. We then explain our own preferred account of copredication: the Property Versatility approach. We conclude by drawing out some substantive consequences of the Property Versatility approach

Off the shelf · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access