Linguistics And Philosophy

By H. Putnam. 1979

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Linguistics

In Philosophy

Citations in the corpus

The Generative Lexicon (1991, background): “Identification of the particular event type (in the sense of Vendler 1967) for a word or phrase: e.g. as state, process, or transition.”
Coordinated Bare Definites (2003, background): “…the meaning of a bare singular coordination does not have the semantic rigidity (consistency of identity across possible worlds) which is for many authors the hallmark of proper names (pace Russell in his later work; see Kripke 1980 for discussion, and Ludlow and Neale 1991 for a different view).”
Finding Pictures of Objects in Large Collections of Images (1996, background): “This distinction4 and a similar distinction for actions, are well-known in linguistics and philosophy (dating back at least toWhorf, 1941) where they are used to predict di erences in the behavior of nouns and verbs (e.g. Taylor, 1977;Tenney, 1987;Fleck, 1996).”
Varieties of Indefinites (2002, background): “Another example of a value set constraint is found in Kadmon and Landman 1993, involving the widening of the value set ofany.”
Vagueness and grammar: the semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives (2007, background): “…analyses of vagueness and developed in most detail as a compositional theory of gradable predicate meaning by Klein (1980) (see also Fine, 1975; Larson, 1988; Kamp, 1975; McConnell-Ginet, 1973), does not make use of degrees (either in the type system or in the semantic ontology), but instead…”
Indirect Speech Acts (2001, methodology): “For example, the speech act of asserting in traditional speech act theory gets divided into several (sub)types of speech act in the sdrt theory: explanations, narrations, corrections and so on (Asher and Lascarides, 1998a).”
The Pragmatics of Polarity (2004, background): “Such pragmatic inferences can be captured in the structure of a scalar model (Fillmore, Kay and O'Connor 1988; Kay 1990, 1997, this volume).”
Negation, Polarity, and Deontic Modals (2013, background): “4.1 Semantic/Pragmatic Approaches The idea that sentences containing NPIs in non-downward-entailing contexts are infelicitous because they violate their conditions of use goes back to Kadmon and Landman 1993.”
Pragmatic Aspects of Grammatical Constructions (2008, background): “10Fillmore et al. (1988) and Kay (1990) argue that scalar models necessarily have at least two dimensions (n>1).”
Minimizers, Maximizers and the Rhetoric of Scalar Reasoning (2001, background): “As a theory of what it is that makes polarity items polarity sensitive, the Scalar Model has much in common with recent proposals by Kadmon and Landman (1993), Lee and Horn (1994), and Krifka (1992, 1995), all of which posit features which are at least partially analogous to informativity.”
Language and Space (2008, background): “I shall not go into the details of this (see [McCawley, 1999]).”