Contexts as Shared Commitments

Contemporary semantics assumes two influential notions of context: one coming from Kaplan (1989), on which contexts are sets of predetermined parameters, and another originating in Stalnaker (1978), on which contexts are sets of propositions that are "common ground." The latter is deserved...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor: García-Carpintero, Manuel
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2015
País:España
Recursos:Universidad de Barcelona
Repositorio:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
OAI Identifier:oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/99486
Acesso em linha:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/99486
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Filosofia del llenguatge
Semàntica (Filosofia)
Pressuposició (Lògica)
Contextualisme (Filosofia)
Philosophy of language
Semantics (Philosophy)
Presupposition (Logic)
Contextualism (Philosophy)
id ES_d5e92f1cd4fc4a40e99c5c52ee93c23a
oai_identifier_str oai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/99486
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Contexts as Shared CommitmentsGarcía-Carpintero, ManuelFilosofia del llenguatgeSemàntica (Filosofia)Pressuposició (Lògica)Contextualisme (Filosofia)Philosophy of languageSemantics (Philosophy)Presupposition (Logic)Contextualism (Philosophy)Contemporary semantics assumes two influential notions of context: one coming from Kaplan (1989), on which contexts are sets of predetermined parameters, and another originating in Stalnaker (1978), on which contexts are sets of propositions that are "common ground." The latter is deservedly more popular, given its flexibility in accounting for context-dependent aspects of language beyond manifest indexicals, such as epistemic modals, predicates of taste, and so on and so forth; in fact, properly dealing with demonstratives (perhaps ultimately all indexicals) requires that further flexibility. Even if we acknowledge Lewis (1980)'s point that, in a sense, Kaplanian contexts already include common ground contexts, it is better to be clear and explicit about what contexts constitutively are. Now, Stalnaker (1978, 2002, 2014) defines context-as-common-ground as a set of propositions, but recent work shows that this is not an accurate conception. The paper explains why, and provides an alternative. The main reason is that several phenomena (presuppositional treatments of pejoratives and predicates of taste, forces other than assertion) require that the common ground includes non-doxastic attitudes such as appraisals, emotions, etc. Hence the common ground should not be taken to include merely contents (propositions), but those together with attitudes concerning them: shared commitments, as I will defend.Frontiers Media2015info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/99486Articles publicats en revistes (Filosofia)reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UBinstname:Universidad de BarcelonaInglésReproducció del document publicat a: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01932Frontiers in Psychology, 2015, vol. 6, p. 1-13http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01932cc-by (c) García-Carpintero, Manuel, 2015http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/esinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessoai:diposit.ub.edu:2445/994862026-05-27T06:46:51Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Contexts as Shared Commitments
title Contexts as Shared Commitments
spellingShingle Contexts as Shared Commitments
García-Carpintero, Manuel
Filosofia del llenguatge
Semàntica (Filosofia)
Pressuposició (Lògica)
Contextualisme (Filosofia)
Philosophy of language
Semantics (Philosophy)
Presupposition (Logic)
Contextualism (Philosophy)
title_short Contexts as Shared Commitments
title_full Contexts as Shared Commitments
title_fullStr Contexts as Shared Commitments
title_full_unstemmed Contexts as Shared Commitments
title_sort Contexts as Shared Commitments
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv García-Carpintero, Manuel
author García-Carpintero, Manuel
author_facet García-Carpintero, Manuel
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Filosofia del llenguatge
Semàntica (Filosofia)
Pressuposició (Lògica)
Contextualisme (Filosofia)
Philosophy of language
Semantics (Philosophy)
Presupposition (Logic)
Contextualism (Philosophy)
topic Filosofia del llenguatge
Semàntica (Filosofia)
Pressuposició (Lògica)
Contextualisme (Filosofia)
Philosophy of language
Semantics (Philosophy)
Presupposition (Logic)
Contextualism (Philosophy)
description Contemporary semantics assumes two influential notions of context: one coming from Kaplan (1989), on which contexts are sets of predetermined parameters, and another originating in Stalnaker (1978), on which contexts are sets of propositions that are "common ground." The latter is deservedly more popular, given its flexibility in accounting for context-dependent aspects of language beyond manifest indexicals, such as epistemic modals, predicates of taste, and so on and so forth; in fact, properly dealing with demonstratives (perhaps ultimately all indexicals) requires that further flexibility. Even if we acknowledge Lewis (1980)'s point that, in a sense, Kaplanian contexts already include common ground contexts, it is better to be clear and explicit about what contexts constitutively are. Now, Stalnaker (1978, 2002, 2014) defines context-as-common-ground as a set of propositions, but recent work shows that this is not an accurate conception. The paper explains why, and provides an alternative. The main reason is that several phenomena (presuppositional treatments of pejoratives and predicates of taste, forces other than assertion) require that the common ground includes non-doxastic attitudes such as appraisals, emotions, etc. Hence the common ground should not be taken to include merely contents (propositions), but those together with attitudes concerning them: shared commitments, as I will defend.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/2445/99486
url https://hdl.handle.net/2445/99486
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Inglés
language_invalid_str_mv Inglés
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Reproducció del document publicat a: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01932
Frontiers in Psychology, 2015, vol. 6, p. 1-13
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01932
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv cc-by (c) García-Carpintero, Manuel, 2015
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv cc-by (c) García-Carpintero, Manuel, 2015
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/es
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Frontiers Media
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Frontiers Media
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Articles publicats en revistes (Filosofia)
reponame:Dipòsit Digital de la UB
instname:Universidad de Barcelona
instname_str Universidad de Barcelona
reponame_str Dipòsit Digital de la UB
collection Dipòsit Digital de la UB
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869420767403311104
score 15.301603