http://hdl.handle.net/1903/2799 2013-05-24T19:03:17Z http://hdl.handle.net/1903/13632 Title: THE SEMANTICS OF PROPER NAMES AND OTHER BARE NOMINALS Authors: Izumi, Yu Abstract: This research proposes a unified approach to the semantics of the so-called bare nominals, which include proper names (e.g., `Mary'), mass and plural terms (e.g., `water', `cats'), and articleless noun phrases in Japanese. I argue that bare nominals themselves are monadic predicates applicable to more than one particular, but they can constitute complex referential phrases when located within an appropriate linguistic environment. Bare nominals used as the subjects or objects of sentences are some or other variant of definite descriptions, which are analyzed as non-quantificational, referential expressions. The overarching thesis is that the semantic properties of bare nominal expressions such as rigidity are not inherent in the words themselves, but derived from the basic features of complex nominal phrases. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1903/13543 Title: On Utterance Interpretation and Metalinguistic-Semantic Competence Authors: Erickson, Kent Wayne Abstract: This study explores the role of what I call metalinguistic-semantic competence (MSC) in the processes of utterance interpretation, and in some cases expression interpretation. MSC is so-called because it is grounded in a speaker's explicit knowledge of (or beliefs about) the lexically-encoded meanings of individual words. More specifically, MSC derives, in part, from having concepts of words--or conceptsW as I distinguish them--whose representational contents, I propose, are corresponding items in a speaker's mental lexicon. The leading idea is that once acquired speakers use their conceptsW to form explicit beliefs about the meanings of words in terms of which extralinguistic concepts those words can (and cannot) coherently be used to express in ordinary conversational situations as constrained by their linguistically-encoded meanings. Or to put the claim differently, I argue that a speaker's explicit conception of word-meanings is a direct conscious reflection of his/her tacit understanding of the various ways in which lexical meanings guide and constrain without fully determining what their host words can (and cannot) be used/uttered to talk about in ordinary discourse. Such metalinguistic knowledge, I contend, quite often plays crucial role in our ability to correctly interpret what other speakers say. The first part of this work details the cognitive mechanisms underlying MSC against the backdrop of a Chomskyan framework for natural language and a Fodorian theory of concepts and their representational contents. The second part explores three ways that MSC might contribute to what I call a speaker's core linguisticsemantic competence. Specifically, I argue that MSC can help explain (i) how competent speakers acquire conceptually underspecified words with their lexical meanings, (ii) the contextual disambiguation of inherently polysemous words, and (iii) the informativeness of true natural language identity statements involving coreferential proper names. The philosophically relevant conclusion is that if any of these proposals pan out then MSC constitutes a proper explanandum of semantic theory, and hence any complete/adequate theory of semantic competence. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1903/13534 Title: OVERLY-GREAT EXPECTATIONS: WHY POLITICAL VOLUNTARISM IS IMPOSSIBLE, WHY PHILOSOPHICAL ANARCHISM IS UNNECESSARY, AND WHY THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM Authors: Runnels, Jennifer Renee Abstract: John Locke argued that legitimate state authority is created when free individuals lend their personal power via consent to the state's governors. Modern Lockean A. John Simmons extends Locke's argument to conclude that, since this does not happen in the real world, philosophical anarchism must be accepted. I argue that classical consent cannot happen in the individual/state relationship. Its requirements can be met in some private relationships because of their special background conditions. The individual/state relationship, however, is not like private relationships, and the nature of the relationship keep classical consent's requirements from being fulfilled. First, state authority must extend over a very large set of issues, from the military and economics to education and health care, in order to perform its functions of mutual protection and advancement. Given the considerable number of state realms of power, coordinating the meaningful consent of thousands, millions, or billions of citizens is downright impossible. Second, classical consent theory requires that the consenter have an adequate understanding of what he is submitting to if that consent is to ground an authority exchange, but given the complexity of the state's constitution and its numerous realms of power, even the most intelligent person could not sufficiently comprehend the terms of the power exchange. Third, the state's directives are fundamentally different from regular interpersonal directives; they are final, sovereign, apply over territory, and require compliance, which is contrary to the voluntaristic spirit. To counter Simmons's argument, I argue that a distinction must be made between object-level governance, what state agents do, and meta-political activity, a category of activities performed by individual citizens that create and maintain state authority. Through meta-political activities, citizens are able to indirectly add to the state's constitution, in ways congruent with their mental powers, practical abilities and nature as private citizens. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/1903/12993 Title: On the Representation of Objects in the Visual System Authors: Kirilov, Dimiter Iavorov Abstract: There is evidence in the psychological literature for representations of objects (Pylyshyn's visual indexes) that refer to and track, not properties, but what in our sort of world typically turn out to be individual physical objects. I am concerned with how such representations acquire their content. Two strategies for accounting for the content of representations are a) representations of particulars refer to the entity that caused them; and b) representations of particulars refer to the entity whose properties are represented by the visual system. The first strategy faces the "which link" problem: since any one of the links in the causal chain leading to the token representation counts as a cause of the token representation, no particular link is individuated as the referent. I examine a recent proposed solution to this problem (Fodor's counterfactual triangulation) and conclude that it fails to determine whether the referent of a visual index is an object, as opposed to a state of affairs, or an event. The problems with the first strategy are a reason to explore the second strategy: representations of objects refer to the entity whose properties are represented by the visual system. I adopt Fodor's asymmetric dependency account (ADA) of intentionality to account for how representations of properties get their content. Fodor's account is chosen not because it is free of problems, but because it has the structure of a theory that promises to deal with many of the classic problems that befall informational semantics (e.g. the disjunction problem). Since ADA is designed to work for causal relations between properties and not for causal relations between particulars, it cannot, by itself, account for how representations of particulars get their content. So I suggest that ADA be supplemented with conceptual role semantics to account for the logico-syntactic roles of representations of particulars. In particular, I suggest that to represent objects the visual system requires the capacity to form and store in memory definite descriptions containing: a) predicates referring to spatio-temporal relations; and b) temporal indexicals. 2012-01-01T00:00:00Z