Kaplan and Marti on definite descriptions
Donnellan’s distinction between referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions gave rise to controversy between semantic and pragmatic accounts of referentially used descriptions. Kaplan adumbrated and Marti elaborated in detail a semantic account that assimilates referentially used de...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Omsk State Technical University, Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education
2023-12-01
|
| Series: | Омский научный вестник: Серия "Общество. История. Современность" |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.omgtu.ru/general_information/media_omgtu/journal_of_omsk_research_journal/files/arhiv/2023/%D0%A2.8,%20%E2%84%964%20(%D0%9E%D0%98%D0%A1)/84-88%20%D0%91%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%20%D0%95.%20%D0%92..pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Donnellan’s distinction between referential and attributive uses of definite
descriptions gave rise to controversy between semantic and pragmatic accounts
of referentially used descriptions. Kaplan adumbrated and Marti elaborated in
detail a semantic account that assimilates referentially used definite descriptions
with proper names in the sense of the theory of direct reference. I argue that the
evidence Kaplan-Marti theory relies on is inappropriate, and conclude that KaplanMarti theory has no advantage over the pragmatic account of referential use in
Donnellan’s sense. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2542-0488 2541-7983 |