Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Indices for evaluating temporal expressions must take the form of a pair ⟨u, e⟩, where u is the time of utterance and e is the time of evaluation
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Kaplan's own formal semantics for 'now' requires a character-content distinction, not a bare ⟨u,e⟩ index pair, making the pair insufficient.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A full treatment of context-dependent expressions requires at minimum a context parameter encoding agent, location, and world alongside time of utterance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Predelli's work on 'deferred utterance' shows that the time of utterance and the context of use can come apart, undermining the assumption that u straightforwardly fixes the utterance anchor.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Cases like recorded speech and written texts demonstrate that 'now' can successfully refer to a time neither of production nor of evaluation, requiring richer indexical machinery than a two-coordinate index.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
The word 'now' must always refer back to the original time of utterance even when 'now' lies in the scope of other temporal operators such as F
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Correctly evaluating sentences containing 'now' under temporal operators requires keeping track of both the time of utterance and the time of evaluation separately
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.