ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY
We investigate whether ordinary quantification over objects is an extensional phenomenon, or rather creates non-extensional contexts; each claim having been propounded by prominent philosophers. It turns out that the question only makes sense relative to a background theory of syntax and semantics (...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The review of symbolic logic 2024-06, Vol.17 (2), p.343-365 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 365 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 343 |
container_title | The review of symbolic logic |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | WEHMEIER, KAI F. |
description | We investigate whether ordinary quantification over objects is an extensional phenomenon, or rather creates non-extensional contexts; each claim having been propounded by prominent philosophers. It turns out that the question only makes sense relative to a background theory of syntax and semantics (here called a grammar) that goes well beyond the inductive definition of formulas and the recursive definition of satisfaction. Two schemas for building quantificational grammars are developed, one that invariably constructs extensional grammars (in which quantification, in particular, thus behaves extensionally) and another that only generates non-extensional grammars (and in which quantification is responsible for the failure of extensionality). We then ask whether there are reasons to favor one of these grammar schemas over the other, and examine an argument according to which the proper formalization of deictic utterances requires adoption of non-extensional grammars. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S1755020324000066 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_3060370517</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1755020324000066</cupid><sourcerecordid>3060370517</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c269t-4e1e6e9e64bbc8604f9c08916b44f5a9bb862ae0d8467d9d90b08232cafce72f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFtBr6uTP5tsjkttdWHZIt2CnkKSTaTFujVpD357U1r0IM5l5g3v9wYGoWsMdxiwuJ9jkedAgBIGqTg_QYP9KgOC8enPDPQcXcS4Sg5CaDFAt7Nm9Lwom7aaVuOyrZIsm4fR5KWdNPOkyrpqXy_Rmdfv0V0d-xAtppN2_JTVs8dE1ZklXG4z5rDjTjrOjLEFB-alhUJibhjzuZbGFJxoB13BuOhkJ8FAQSix2lsniKdDdHPI3YT-c-fiVq36XfhIJxUFDlRAjkVy4YPLhj7G4LzahOVahy-FQe2fof48IzH0yOi1Ccvuzf1G_099A8D_W3Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3060370517</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY</title><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</creator><creatorcontrib>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</creatorcontrib><description>We investigate whether ordinary quantification over objects is an extensional phenomenon, or rather creates non-extensional contexts; each claim having been propounded by prominent philosophers. It turns out that the question only makes sense relative to a background theory of syntax and semantics (here called a grammar) that goes well beyond the inductive definition of formulas and the recursive definition of satisfaction. Two schemas for building quantificational grammars are developed, one that invariably constructs extensional grammars (in which quantification, in particular, thus behaves extensionally) and another that only generates non-extensional grammars (and in which quantification is responsible for the failure of extensionality). We then ask whether there are reasons to favor one of these grammar schemas over the other, and examine an argument according to which the proper formalization of deictic utterances requires adoption of non-extensional grammars.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1755-0203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1755-0211</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1755020324000066</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, USA: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Grammar ; Grammars ; Semantics ; Syntax</subject><ispartof>The review of symbolic logic, 2024-06, Vol.17 (2), p.343-365</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Symbolic Logic</rights><rights>The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Association for Symbolic Logic. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c269t-4e1e6e9e64bbc8604f9c08916b44f5a9bb862ae0d8467d9d90b08232cafce72f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6468-497X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1755020324000066/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</creatorcontrib><title>ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY</title><title>The review of symbolic logic</title><addtitle>The Review of Symbolic Logic</addtitle><description>We investigate whether ordinary quantification over objects is an extensional phenomenon, or rather creates non-extensional contexts; each claim having been propounded by prominent philosophers. It turns out that the question only makes sense relative to a background theory of syntax and semantics (here called a grammar) that goes well beyond the inductive definition of formulas and the recursive definition of satisfaction. Two schemas for building quantificational grammars are developed, one that invariably constructs extensional grammars (in which quantification, in particular, thus behaves extensionally) and another that only generates non-extensional grammars (and in which quantification is responsible for the failure of extensionality). We then ask whether there are reasons to favor one of these grammar schemas over the other, and examine an argument according to which the proper formalization of deictic utterances requires adoption of non-extensional grammars.</description><subject>Grammar</subject><subject>Grammars</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Syntax</subject><issn>1755-0203</issn><issn>1755-0211</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>IKXGN</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE9LAzEQxYMoWKsfwFtBr6uTP5tsjkttdWHZIt2CnkKSTaTFujVpD357U1r0IM5l5g3v9wYGoWsMdxiwuJ9jkedAgBIGqTg_QYP9KgOC8enPDPQcXcS4Sg5CaDFAt7Nm9Lwom7aaVuOyrZIsm4fR5KWdNPOkyrpqXy_Rmdfv0V0d-xAtppN2_JTVs8dE1ZklXG4z5rDjTjrOjLEFB-alhUJibhjzuZbGFJxoB13BuOhkJ8FAQSix2lsniKdDdHPI3YT-c-fiVq36XfhIJxUFDlRAjkVy4YPLhj7G4LzahOVahy-FQe2fof48IzH0yOi1Ccvuzf1G_099A8D_W3Y</recordid><startdate>20240601</startdate><enddate>20240601</enddate><creator>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>IKXGN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6468-497X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240601</creationdate><title>ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY</title><author>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c269t-4e1e6e9e64bbc8604f9c08916b44f5a9bb862ae0d8467d9d90b08232cafce72f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Grammar</topic><topic>Grammars</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Syntax</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Cambridge Journals Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>The review of symbolic logic</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>WEHMEIER, KAI F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY</atitle><jtitle>The review of symbolic logic</jtitle><addtitle>The Review of Symbolic Logic</addtitle><date>2024-06-01</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>343</spage><epage>365</epage><pages>343-365</pages><issn>1755-0203</issn><eissn>1755-0211</eissn><abstract>We investigate whether ordinary quantification over objects is an extensional phenomenon, or rather creates non-extensional contexts; each claim having been propounded by prominent philosophers. It turns out that the question only makes sense relative to a background theory of syntax and semantics (here called a grammar) that goes well beyond the inductive definition of formulas and the recursive definition of satisfaction. Two schemas for building quantificational grammars are developed, one that invariably constructs extensional grammars (in which quantification, in particular, thus behaves extensionally) and another that only generates non-extensional grammars (and in which quantification is responsible for the failure of extensionality). We then ask whether there are reasons to favor one of these grammar schemas over the other, and examine an argument according to which the proper formalization of deictic utterances requires adoption of non-extensional grammars.</abstract><cop>New York, USA</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1755020324000066</doi><tpages>23</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6468-497X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1755-0203 |
ispartof | The review of symbolic logic, 2024-06, Vol.17 (2), p.343-365 |
issn | 1755-0203 1755-0211 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_3060370517 |
source | Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Grammar Grammars Semantics Syntax |
title | ON QUANTIFICATION AND EXTENSIONALITY |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T14%3A34%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=ON%20QUANTIFICATION%20AND%20EXTENSIONALITY&rft.jtitle=The%20review%20of%20symbolic%20logic&rft.au=WEHMEIER,%20KAI%20F.&rft.date=2024-06-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=343&rft.epage=365&rft.pages=343-365&rft.issn=1755-0203&rft.eissn=1755-0211&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1755020324000066&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3060370517%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3060370517&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1755020324000066&rfr_iscdi=true |