Maria Aloni

Individual concepts in modal predicate logic

Abstract The article deals with the interpretation of propositional attitudes in the framework of modal predicate logic. The first part discusses the classical puzzles arising from the interplay between propositional attitudes, quantifiers and the notion of identity. After comparing different reactions to these puzzles it argues in favor of an analysis in which evaluations of de re attitudes may vary relative to the ways of identifying objects used in the context of use. The second part of the article gives this analysis a precise formalization from a model- and proof-theoretic perspective.

Knowing whether A or B

The paper examines the logic and semantics of knowledge attributions of the form “s knows whether A or B”. We analyze these constructions in an epistemic logic with alternative questions, and propose an account of the context-sensitivity of the corresponding sentences and of their presuppositions.

CONCEALED QUESTIONS UNDER COVER

Our evaluation of questions and knowledge attributions may vary relative to the way in which the relevant objects are identified. In the first part, the article proposes a theory that represents different methods of trans-world identification and is able to account for their impact on interpretation. In the second part, the same theory is used to account for the meaning of concealed questions. On the proposed account, the interpretation of a concealed question results from the application of a type-shifting operation mapping an individual denoting expression into an identity question interpreted relative to a contextually selected identification method.

Expressing Ignorance or Indifference

The article presents a formal analysis in the framework of bi-directional optimality theory of the free choice, ignorance and indifference implicatures conveyed by the use of indefinite expressions or disjunctions. Ignorance is expressed by standard means of epistemic logic. To express indifference we use Groenendijk and Stokhofs question meanings. To derive implicature, Grices conversational maxims, and an additional principle expressing preferences for minimal models, are formulated as violable constraints used to select optimal candidates out of a set of alternative sentence-context pairs. The implicatures of an utterance of ?are then defined as the sentences which are entailed by any optimal context for ?(but not by ?itself). Entailment is defined in a version of update semantics where contextual updates are derived by competition among contexts. Free choice and other modal implicatures of disjunctions and indefinites will follow, but also scalar implicatures and exhaustification.

Logic, language and meaning: 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, December 16-18, 2009: Revised selected papers

This book contains the revised papers presented at the 8th Amsterdam Colloquium 2011, held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in December 2011. The 46 thoroughly refereed and revised contributions out of 137 submissions presented together with 2 invited talks are organized in five sections. The first section contains the invited contributions. The second, third and fourth sections incorporate submitted contributions to the three thematic workshops that were hosted by the Colloquium and addressed the following topics: inquisitiveness; formal semantics and pragmatics of sign languages, formal semantic evidence. The final section presents the submitted contributions to the general program.

The Cambridge Handbook of Formal Semantics

Formal semantics – the scientific study of meaning in natural language – is one of the most fundamental and longest-established areas of linguistics. This handbook offers a comprehensive yet compact guide to the field, bringing together research from a wide range of world-leading experts. Chapters include coverage of the historical context and foundation of contemporary formal semantics, a survey of the variety of formal/logical approaches to linguistic meaning, and an overview of the major areas of research within current semantic theory, broadly conceived. The handbook also explores the interfaces between semantics and neighbouring disciplines, including research in cognition and computation. This work will be essential reading for students and researchers working in linguistics, philosophy, psychology, and computer science.

1: The Semantics and Pragmatics of Questions

With this introduction we aim to give a sketch of the research area in which questions are studied from the perspective of a semanticist, a formal linguist interested in the notion of ‘meaning’. We start with explaining some general notions and insights in this area, and then zoom in on one of the most influential theories about questions, the partition theory of Groenendijk and Stokhof (section 1.1). In section 1.2 we concisely discuss some alternatives to the partition semantics, and some current issues in the debate about the meanings of questions, which will also pop up every now and then in the contributions to this volume. Then, in section 1.3, we have a thematic discussion of the contributions to this volume themselves, considering them one by one and in relation to each other. We end (section 1.4) with a sketch of some issues which, we think, still abide or have arisen from this volume as a whole.

6: The Dynamics of Topic and Focus

A dynamic view on meanings as context change potentials provides a substantial account of the dependence of focused answers on the context set up by their preceding questions. Questions pose conditions on the focal structure of their answers and can further restrict the domain of subsequent focusing operators like only . Standard analyses of focus define congruence in terms of identity between the question meaning and the focal alternatives of the answer. Most existing dynamic analyses of questions have been developed in the tradition of the partition theory of Groenendijk and Stokhof. This chapter presents update semantics of questions and focuses building on Gawrons dynamic model of domain restriction. It describes how dynamic analysis gives an interesting characterization of the notion of discourse congruence which covers contextual restrictions. Finally, the chapter explains how questions can restrict the domain of quantificational sentences used later in a discourse within dynamic semantics. Keywords: discourse congruence; domain restriction; dynamic semantics; Gawrons dynamic model; partition theory

Logic, Language and Meaning

This book contains the revised papers presented at the Amsterdam Colloquium 2009, held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in December 2009. The 41 refereed and revised contributions presented together with the revised abstracts of 5 invited talks are organized in five sections: the first section contains extended abstracts of the talks given by the invited speakers; the second, third and fourth sections contain invited and submitted contributions to the three thematic workshops hosted by the colloquium: the Workshop on Implicature and Grammar, the Workshop on Natural Logic, and the Workshop on Vagueness; the final section consists of submissions to the general program. The topics covered range from descriptive (syntactic and semantic analyses of all kinds of expressions) to theoretical (logical and computational properties of semantic theories, philosophical foundations, evolution and learning of language).

Knowing-Who in Quantified Epistemic Logic

This article proposes an account of knowing-who constructions within a generalisation of Hintikka’s (Knowledge and belief. Cornell UP, Ithaca, MA, [10]) quantified epistemic logic employing the notion of a conceptual cover Aloni PhD thesis [1]. The proposed logical system captures the inherent context-sensitivity of knowing-wh constructions Boer and Lycan (Knowing Who. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, [5]), as well as expresses non-trivial cases of so-called concealed questions Heim (Semantics from different points of view. Springer, Berlin, [9]). Assuming that quantifying into epistemic contexts and knowing-who are linked in the way Hintikka had proposed, the context dependence of the latter will translate into a context dependence of de re attitude ascriptions and this will result in a ready account of a number of traditionally problematic cases including Quine’s well-known double vision puzzles Quine (The ways of Paradox and other essays. Random House, New York, [16]).