The conjunction reduction test proves semantic difference only when predicates contribute distinct truth conditions, but categorial oddness can arise from pragmatic or sortal violations rather than lexical ambiguity.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
Sortal violations(as used in philosophy and logic)
Mixing up different categories of things in a way that doesn't make logical sense (like trying to apply a color to a number).
Truth conditions(used to describe how we determine whether a thought accurately represents reality)
The specific circumstances or facts that would make a statement true or false—what has to be the case for a thought to be correct.
lexical ambiguity(Underpins Kripke's cross-linguistic test: because the co-occurrence of meanings in one word form is accidental, unrelated languages would not be expected to reproduce the same pairing)
Accidental homophony in which two separate and unrelated meanings are expressed by the same phonological form
semantic difference(in philosophy of language)
A difference in meaning between two words or phrases, even if they might refer to the same thing.