File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1111/mila.12118
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84994126505
- WOS: WOS:000389132400001
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Generics, Covert Structure and Logical Form
Title | Generics, Covert Structure and Logical Form |
---|---|
Authors | |
Issue Date | 2016 |
Citation | Mind and Language, 2016, v. 31, n. 5, p. 503-529 How to Cite? |
Abstract | © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd The standard view amongst philosophers of language and linguists is that the logical form of generics is quantificational and contains a covert, unpronounced quantifier expression Gen. Recently, some theorists have begun to question the standard view and rekindle the competing proposal, that generics are a species of kind-predication. These theorists offer some forceful objections to the standard view, and new strategies for dealing with the abundance of linguistic evidence in favour of the standard view. I respond to these objections and show that their strategies fail. I offer a novel argument in favour of the standard view that I call the binder argument. The upshot of this argument is that if one rejects the existence of Gen, then one is committed to rejecting the existence of covert structure in general (including domain variables and implicit argument places). |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/286933 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 1.8 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.626 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Sterken, Rachel Katharine | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2020-09-07T11:46:03Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2020-09-07T11:46:03Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Mind and Language, 2016, v. 31, n. 5, p. 503-529 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0268-1064 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/286933 | - |
dc.description.abstract | © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd The standard view amongst philosophers of language and linguists is that the logical form of generics is quantificational and contains a covert, unpronounced quantifier expression Gen. Recently, some theorists have begun to question the standard view and rekindle the competing proposal, that generics are a species of kind-predication. These theorists offer some forceful objections to the standard view, and new strategies for dealing with the abundance of linguistic evidence in favour of the standard view. I respond to these objections and show that their strategies fail. I offer a novel argument in favour of the standard view that I call the binder argument. The upshot of this argument is that if one rejects the existence of Gen, then one is committed to rejecting the existence of covert structure in general (including domain variables and implicit argument places). | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Mind and Language | - |
dc.title | Generics, Covert Structure and Logical Form | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/mila.12118 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84994126505 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 31 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 503 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 529 | - |
dc.identifier.eissn | 1468-0017 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000389132400001 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0268-1064 | - |