Defusing easy arguments for numbers

Zitieren

Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Dateien Größe Format Anzeige

Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.

BALCERAK JACKSON, Brendan, 2013. Defusing easy arguments for numbers. In: Linguistics and Philosophy. 36(6), pp. 447-461. ISSN 0165-0157. eISSN 1573-0549

@article{Balcerak Jackson2013Defus-26617, title={Defusing easy arguments for numbers}, year={2013}, doi={10.1007/s10988-013-9142-4}, number={6}, volume={36}, issn={0165-0157}, journal={Linguistics and Philosophy}, pages={447--461}, author={Balcerak Jackson, Brendan} }

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/26617"> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:bibliographicCitation>Linguistics and Philosophy ; 36 (2013), 6. - S. 447-461</dcterms:bibliographicCitation> <dc:creator>Balcerak Jackson, Brendan</dc:creator> <dcterms:title>Defusing easy arguments for numbers</dcterms:title> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2014-03-04T09:45:45Z</dc:date> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2014-03-04T09:45:45Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Pairs of sentences like the following pose a problem for ontology: (1) Jupiter has four moons. (2) The number of moons of Jupiter is four. (2) is intuitively a trivial paraphrase of (1). And yet while (1) seems ontologically innocent, (2) appears to imply the existence of numbers. Thomas Hofweber proposes that we can resolve the puzzle by recognizing that sentence (2) is syntactically derived from, and has the same meaning as, sentence (1). Despite appearances, the expressions ‘the number of moons of Jupiter’ and ‘four’ do not function semantically as singular terms in (2). Hofweber’s primary evidence for this proposal concerns differences in the focus-related communicative functions of (1) and (2). In this paper I raise several serious problems for Hofweber’s proposal, and for his attempt to support it by appeal to focus-related phenomena. I conclude by offering independent evidence for an alternative, purely pragmatic resolution of the ontological puzzle.</dcterms:abstract> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/26617"/> <dcterms:issued>2013</dcterms:issued> <dc:rights>deposit-license</dc:rights> <dc:contributor>Balcerak Jackson, Brendan</dc:contributor> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-20140905103605204-4002607-1"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

Das Dokument erscheint in:

KOPS Suche


Stöbern

Mein Benutzerkonto