Unembedded definite descriptions and relevance

• Autores: Robert J. Stainton
• Localización: Alicante Journal of English Studies / Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses: RAEI, ISSN-e 2171-861X, ISSN 0214-4808, Nº. 11, 1998 (Ejemplar dedicado a: Relevance theory / coord. por José Mateo Martínez, Francisco Yus Ramos), págs. 231-240
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • Definite descriptions (e.g. "The king of France in 1997", "The teacher of Aristotle") do not stand for particulars. Or so I will assume. The semantic alternative has seemed to be that descriptions only have meaning within sentences: i.e., that their semantic contribution is given syncategorimatically. This doesn't seem right, however, because descriptions can be used and understood outside the context of any sentence. Nor is this use simply a matter of "ellipsis." Since descriptions do not denote particulars, but seem to have a meaning in isolation, I propose that they be assigned generalized quantifiers as denotations - i.e. a kind of function, from sets/properties to propositions. I then defend the pragmatic plausibility of this proposal, using Relevance Theory. Specifically, I argue that, even taken as standing for generalized quantifiers, descriptions could still be used and understood in interpersonal communication.