Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Daniel Rothschild is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Daniel Rothschild.


Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics | 2014

Capturing the relationship between conditionals and conditional probability with a trivalent semantics

Daniel Rothschild

Assigning truth-conditions to conditional statements leads to problems in assigning probabilities to those statements (Lewis, 1976). This note presents and assesses a trivalent semantics of conditional sentence, arguing that this semantics does well at capturing the probabilities of conditional statements. The major problems and prospects for this view are reviewed.


Theoretical Linguistics | 2008

Transparency Theory and its dynamic alternatives: Commentary on "be Articulate"

Daniel Rothschild

“Be Articulate: A Pragmatic Theory of Presupposition Projection” is a remarkable paper in at least two respects: First, it is the only broadly Gricean treatment of presuppositions that generates precise and accurate predictions about the pattern of presupposition projection. Schlenker proposes that presuppositions arise as a result of a pragmatic prohibition against using one short construction to express two independent meanings. This basic idea is quite an old one. But no one has ever elaborated this pragmatic story in a way that yields a systematic theory of presupposition projection. Indeed, for many, the fact that pragmatic approaches to presupposition did not easily account for a wide range of projection behavior (most previous accounts contented themselves by treating projection out of negation) was a reason to be skeptical of such pragmatic approaches. Schlenker’s work puts this worry about Gricean accounts to rest. Second, Schlenker has shown how one can give an account of presupposition projection without stipulating properties of the logical connectives that not do not follow from their truth-conditional meaning along with other general features of the account. As far as I know, no previous, empirically adequate theory accomplished this. In this short commentary I will argue for two main points: The first point relates to the second aspect of Schlenker’s theory that I mentioned. Schlenker argues that Transparency Theory has an explanatory advantage over dynamic semantics because of its non-stipulative treatment of the different logical connectives. However, I argue that dynamic semantics can, in a very natural way, be modified to yield an explanatory theory that stipulates nothing about each binary connective besides its truth-conditions. So Transparency Theory does not stand alone in being able to make accurate predictions about presupposition projection without connective-specific stipulations. I am not all confident that dynamic approaches to presupposition projection are correct, but I am sure that they need not be stipulative in the way in which the theory of Heim (1983) is. Second, I will argue that Schlenker is right to give both symmetric and asymmetric theories of presupposition projection. However, I will point out that Schlenker’s symmetric theory of pre1See, for instance, Stalnaker (1974) and Grice (1981). 2In fact, since Schlenker’s work was first made publicly available at least two other theories that can predict the basic pattern of presupposition projection without connective-specific stipulations have emerged: Chemla (2008) treats presuppositions as a form of scalar implicature, while George (2008) revives the strong Kleene truth-tables to predict the basic pattern of presupposition projection. 3To my knowledge, Schlenker is right in suggesting that all subsequent work in the dynamic tradition has also imported stipulations akin to Heim’s to predict the pattern of presupposition projection.


Journal of Philosophical Logic | 2015

Conditionals and Propositions in Semantics

Daniel Rothschild

The project of giving an account of meaning in natural languages goes largely by assigning truth-conditional content to sentences. I will call the view that sentences have truth-conditional content propositionalism as it is common to identify the truth-conditional content of a sentence with the proposition it expresses. This content plays an important role in our explanations of the speech-acts, attitude ascriptions, and the meaning of sentences when they appear as parts of longer sentences. Much work in philosophy of language and linguistics semantics over the last halfcentury has aimed to characterize the truth-conditional content of different aspects of language.


Semantics and Pragmatics | 2011

Explaining presupposition projection with dynamic semantics

Daniel Rothschild


Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society , 112 (1 PART 1) pp. 99-114. (2012) | 2012

V-expressing credences

Daniel Rothschild


The Journal of Philosophy | 2007

Presuppositions and Scope

Daniel Rothschild


Natural Language Semantics | 2012

Connectives without truth tables

Nathan Klinedinst; Daniel Rothschild


Noûs | 2013

Do Indicative Conditionals Express Propositions

Daniel Rothschild


Noûs | 2017

On the Dynamics of Conversation

Daniel Rothschild; Seth Yalcin


Philosophical Studies | 2016

Belief is weak

John Hawthorne; Daniel Rothschild; Levi Spectre

Collaboration


Dive into the Daniel Rothschild's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Levi Spectre

Open University of Israel

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Seth Yalcin

University of California

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Emmanuel Chemla

École Normale Supérieure

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Vincent Homer

École Normale Supérieure

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge