The copredication argument

Collins, John (2017) The copredication argument. Inquiry-An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, 60 (7). pp. 675-702. ISSN 0020-174X

Preview

PDF (Copredication_argument) - Accepted Version Download (693kB) | Preview

Abstract

The standard view of truth-conditional semantics is that it is world-involving in the sense that a theory that specifies truth conditions eo ipso is a theory that specifies the way the world must be if the target sentences are to be true. It would appear to follow that the semantic properties of expressions, such as nominals, specify the very worldly objects that make true or false the sentences that host the nominals. Chomsky and others have raised a fundamental complaint against this thought: perfectly quotidian nominals, such as London or book, may occur copredicatively as a single argument of categorically mismatched predicates, which prima facie preclude a coherent uniform construal of the nominal argument. The argument has hitherto been presented via examples that challenge the standard view. My aim here is to present the argument explicitly, defend it against some likely counterclaims, and resolve what might appear to be a decisive consideration against the conclusion of the argument, viz., if nominals as copredicatively occurring do not contribute uniform worldly entities, then how can the copredicative constructions be counted as true?

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	copredication,semantic externalism,truth
Faculty \ School:	Faculty of Arts and Humanities > School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies (former - to 2024)
UEA Research Groups:	Faculty of Arts and Humanities > Research Groups > Philosophy
Depositing User:	Pure Connector
Date Deposited:	24 Mar 2017 01:40
Last Modified:	25 Sep 2024 12:40
URI:	https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/63077
DOI:	10.1080/0020174X.2017.1321500

Downloads

Actions (login required)

View Item