Massimiliano Vignolo

A Conceptual Model for a Web-Scale Entity Name System

The problem of identity and reference is receiving increasing attention in the (semantic) web community and is emerging as one of the key features which distinguish traditional knowledge representation from knowledge representation on the web with respect to data interlinking and knowledge integration on a large scale. As part of this debate, the OKKAM project proposed the creation of an Entity Name System which provides rigid identifiers, named OKKAMids, for any type of concrete and particular entities, and links OKKAMids to existing identifiers which have been created elsewhere for the same entity. The introduction of these identifiers raises some practical and conceptual concerns. In this paper we address them by extending two proposed ontologies (IRE and IRW) to accomodate the notion of OKKAMid, describe their formal properties, illustrate why they may play an important role in the construction of the Semantic Web and discuss how they can be integrated with other approaches for mapping URIs onto each others.

Testing the causal theory of reference

Theories of reference are a crucial research topic in analytic philosophy. Since the publication of Kripkes Naming and Necessity, most philosophers have endorsed the causal/historical theory of reference. The goal of this paper is twofold: (i) to discuss a method for testing experimentally the causal theory of reference for proper names by investigating linguistic usage and (ii) to present the results from two experiments conducted with that method. Data collected in our experiments confirm the causal theory of reference for people proper names and for geographical proper names. A secondary but interesting result is that the semantic domain affects reference assignment: while with people proper names speakers tend to assign the semantic reference, with geographical proper names they are prompted to assign the speakers reference.

Referential/Attributive: The Explanatory Gap of the Contextualist Theory

I argue that the contextualist account of the referential/attributive interpretation of definite descriptions, presented by Recanati and Bezuidehnout and based on the idea that definite descriptions are semantically underdetermined and in need of completion through optional top-down pragmatic processes, suffers from an explanatory gap. I defend the contextualist view but hold that the determination of the content of definite descriptions is a mandatory, linguistically driven process based on saturation rather than on optional pragmatic processes.

Assessment Sensitivity in Legal Discourse

Abstract We explain three phenomena in legal discourse in terms of MacFarlane’s assessment-sensitive semantics: incompatible applications of law, assessments of statements about what is legally the case, and retrospective overruling. The claim is that assessment sensitivity fits in with the view, shared by many legal theorists at least with respect to hard cases, that the final adjudicator’s interpretation of legal sources is constitutive of the applied norm. We argue that there are strong analogies between certain kinds of statements in legal discourse as understood in light of that view and discourse about matters of taste and future contingents. Thus, if assessment-sensitive semantics provides a compelling account of discourse about matters of taste and future contingents, then it likewise provides a compelling account of those statements in legal discourse.

Semantica, metafisica e competenza linguistica: l'eredità di Dummett

Throughout his philosophical career, Michael Dummett held firmly two theses: (I) the theory of meaning has a central position in philosophy and all other forms of philosophical inquiry rest upon semantic analysis, in particular semantic issues replace traditional metaphysical issues; (II) the theory of meaning is a theory of understanding. I will defend neither of them. However, I will argue that there is an important lesson we ought to learn by reflecting on the link between linguistic competence and semantics, which I take to be an important part of Dummett’s legacy in philosophy of language. I discuss this point in relation to Cappelen and Lepore’s criticism of Incompleteness Arguments.

Contextualism, Pragmatics and Definite Descriptions

Contextualism, Pragmatics and Definite Descriptions Very few philosophers and linguists doubt that definite descriptions have attributive uses and referential uses. The point of disagreement concerns whether the difference in uses is grounded on a difference in meaning. The Ambiguity Theory holds while the Implicature Theory denies that definite descriptions are ambiguous expressions, having an attributive meaning and a referential meaning. Contextualists have attempted to steer between the Ambiguity Theory and the Implicature Theory. I claim that the early contextualist account provided by Recanati and Bezuidehnout based on the idea that definite descriptions are semantically underdetermined and in need of a completion from the contextually available information through an optional top-down pragmatic process suffers from an explanatory gap.

Abstracting Propositions: How Many of Them Do We Need?

Summary Anthony Wrigley presents the plenitude objection that, he claims, affects any attempt to introduce propositions via abstraction. I argue that the plenitude objection begs the question against the abstraction of propositions. Then I respond to a semantic objection to the abstraction of propositions. Finally I reply to a third objection that questions the usefulness of the abstraction of propositions.