Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T16:33:23.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2 - Acquaintance Relations

from Part I - Reporting and Ascribing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 October 2022

Daniel Altshuler
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

We defend an acquaintance-based semantics for ‘de re’ attitude reports. We begin by surveying the philosophical literature on the logical form of the ‘de re’, with particular attention to how acquaintance relations solve the problem posed by so-called double vision scenarios. We reject the view that cognitive contact with the ‘res’ requires causal interaction: the causal conception of acquaintance is inadequately motivated in the philosophical literature on the ‘de re’. We then turn to other linguistic data. We show that the ‘de re’ analysis is needed to account for certain tense constructions. The success of this application provides a further reason to reject an exclusively causal conception of acquaintance, since the kind of cognitive contact relevant to ‘de re’ attitudes towards times cannot plausibly be causal. We discuss objections to the ‘de re’ analysis of tense, such as the apparent unavailability of double vision scenarios involving times. We consider various additional principles and constraints that further refine the theory’s predictions, and conclude that while further research is needed to fully vindicate the ‘de re’ analysis in this application, it offers the most unified and well-motivated account of the embedded tense data currently on offer.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abusch, D. (1988). Sequence of tense, intensionality and scope. In Borer, H. (Ed.), The Proceedings of the 7th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford Linguistics Association.Google Scholar
Abusch, D. (1994). Sequence of tense revisited: Two semantic accounts of tense in intensional contexts. In Kamp, H. (Ed.), Ellipsis, Tense and Questions, Dyana-2 Esprit Basic research Project 6852, Deliverable R2.2.B.Google Scholar
Abusch, D. (1997). Sequence of tense and temporal ‘de re’. Linguistics and Philosophy, 20, 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altshuler, D., & Schwarzschild, R. (2013). Moment of change, cessation implicatures and simultaneous readings. Sinn und Bedeutung, 17, 4562.Google Scholar
Bary, C. (2022). Present Tense. In Altshuler, D. (Ed.), Linguistics Meets Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cariani, F., & Santorio, P. (2018). Will done better: Selection semantics, future credence, and indeterminacy. Mind, 127(505), 129165.Google Scholar
Chierchia, G., & McConnell-Ginet, S. (2000). Meaning and Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, B. (1985). Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cresswell, M. J. (1985). Structured Meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cresswell, M. J., & von Stechow, A. (1982). ‘De re’ belief generalized. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 503535.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. (1987). The Intentional Stance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Enç, M. (1981). Tense without Scope: An Analysis of Nouns as Indexicals. PhD dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
Gennari, S. (2003). Tense meanings and temporal interpretation. Journal of Semantics, 20, 3571.Google Scholar
Fodor, J. D. (1970). The Linguistic Description of Opaque Contexts. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Frege, G. (1892). Über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, 100, 2550.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, J., & Manley, D. (2012). The Reference Book. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heim, I. (1994). Comments on Abusch’s theory of tense. In Kamp, H. (Ed.), Ellipsis, Tense and Questions, DYANA deliverable R2.2.B, 143170. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Higginbotham, J. (2001). Why is sequence of tense obligatory? In Liakata, M., Jensen, B., & Maillat, D. (Eds.), Oxford University Working Papers in Linguistics, Philosophy and Phonetics, Vol. 6 (pp. 6790). Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1931). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, Part IV, Syntax, Third Volume, Time and Tense. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitatsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. (1968). Quantifying in. Synthese, 19(1), 178214.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. (1989). Demonstratives. In Almog, J., Perry, J., & Wettstein, H. (Eds.), Themes from Kaplan (pp. 481563). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kauf, C., & Zeijlstra, H. (2018). Towards a new explanation of sequence of tense. In Maspong, S., Stefánsdóttir, B., Blake, K., & Davis, F. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 28 (pp. 59–77).Google Scholar
Klecha, P. (2015). Double access. Unpublished manuscript, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Klecha, P. (2016). Modality and embedded temporal operators. Semantics and Pragmatics, 9, 155.Google Scholar
Klein, E. H. (1979). On Sentences Which Report Beliefs, Desires, and Other Mental Attitudes. PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kratzer, A. (2022). Attitude Ascriptions and Speech Reports. In Altshuler, D. (Ed.), Linguistics Meets Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and Necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ladusaw, W. (1977). Some problems with tense in PTQ. Texas Linguistic Forum, 6, 89102.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. K. (1979). Attitudes de dicto and de se. Philosophical Review, 88(4), 513543.Google Scholar
McGinn, C. (1981). The mechanism of reference. Synthese, 29, 157186.Google Scholar
Ninan, D. (2012). Counterfactual attitudes and multi-centered worlds. Semantics and Pragmatics, 5(5), 157.Google Scholar
Ogihara, T. (1996). Tense, attitudes, and scope. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Ogihara, T., & Sharvit, Y. (2012). Embedded tenses. In Binnick, R. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Tense and Aspect (pp. 638668). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Partee, B. H. 1973. Some structural analogies between tenses and pronouns in English. The Journal of Philosophy, 70, 601609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearson, H. (2018). Counterfactual de se. Semantics and Pragmatics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.11.2.Google Scholar
Percus, O. (2000). Constraints on some other variables in syntax. Natural Language Semantics, 8(3), 173229.Google Scholar
Percus, O., & Sauerland, U. (2003). On the LFs of attitude reports. Sinn und Bedeutung, 7, 228242.Google Scholar
Proops, I. (2014). Russellian acquaintance revisited. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 52, 779811.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. Journal of Philosophy, 53, 177218.Google Scholar
Russell, B. (1911). Knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 11, 108128.Google Scholar
Salmon, N. (2004). The good, the bad, and the ugly. In Bezuidenhout, A. & Reimer, M. (Eds.), Descriptions and Beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schwager, M. (2011). Speaking of qualities. In Cormany, E., Ito, S., & Lutz, D. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 19 (pp. 395–412).Google Scholar
Sharvit, Y. (2018). Sequence of tense: Syntax, semantics, pragmatics. In Patel-Grosz, P., Grosz, P., & Zobel, S. (Eds.), Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy Vol. 99: Pronouns in Embedded Contexts at the Syntax–Semantics Interface (pp. 215247). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Sharvit, Y. (2020). Sequence of tense. In Matthewson, L., Meier, C., Rullmann, H., Zimmermann, T. E., & Gutzmann, D. (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics. Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
Smith, C. (1978). The syntax and interpretation of temporal expressions in English. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2, 4399.Google Scholar
von Stechow, A. (1995). On the proper treatment of tense. In Simons, M. & Galloway, T. (Eds.), Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT), Vol. 5 (pp. 362–386).Google Scholar
Tsilia, A. (2021). Embedded Tense: Insights from Modern Greek. MA thesis, École Normale Supérieure, Paris.Google Scholar
Tsompanidis, V. (2015). Mental files and times. Topoi, 34(1), 233240.Google Scholar
Wettstein, H. (1986). Has semantics rested on a mistake? The Journal of Philosophy, 83, 185209.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×