Local Information in Discourse

dc.contributor.advisorWilliams, Alexanderen_US
dc.contributor.advisorCariani, Fabrizioen_US
dc.contributor.authorKendrick, Jonathan Caleben_US
dc.contributor.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.contributor.publisherDigital Repository at the University of Marylanden_US
dc.contributor.publisherUniversity of Maryland (College Park, Md.)en_US
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-23T06:01:03Z
dc.date.available2024-09-23T06:01:03Z
dc.date.issued2024en_US
dc.description.abstractThis dissertation argues that the interpretation of modals, expressions like “might,” “should,” and “must,” are constrained by their local context. For epistemic modals, local contexts bound the admissible domains of modal quantification. In Chapter 2, we use this fact to explain why epistemic “must” is weaker than the □ operator from epistemic modal logic. For root (i.e., non-deontic) modals, local contexts restrict the domain of quantification. In Chapter 3, we show this yields a solution to the Samaritan Paradox concerning why deontic modals do not inherit presuppositions under entailment. In Chapter 4, we propose a solution to the “if ?, ought ?” problem based on default logic. According to this solution, “ought”’s ordering source consists of default rules and the domain consists of the conclusion of the defaults triggered in the local context.en_US
dc.identifierhttps://doi.org/10.13016/vc7j-sbkc
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1903/33368
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledPhilosophyen_US
dc.subject.pqcontrolledLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledlocal contextsen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledmodalityen_US
dc.subject.pquncontrolledsemanticsen_US
dc.titleLocal Information in Discourseen_US
dc.typeDissertationen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
Kendrick_umd_0117E_24553.pdf
Size:
806.2 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
(RESTRICTED ACCESS)