Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Two readings with distinct truth conditions and presuppos... — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The sentence 'Putin only poisons his opponents' is ambiguous at the sentence level due to focal stress.

    Two readings with distinct truth conditions and presuppositions constitute an ambiguity.

    Philosophy of Language
    ?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.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    Focal stress on different words introduces different sets of alternatives and di...If focal stress is syntactically marked, the logical form disambiguates the two ...The sentence 'Putin only poisons his opponents' is ambiguous at the sentence lev...The stress-unmarked reading (78) is falsified by Putin shooting an opponent, whi...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    When one putative reading entails another, the two 'readings' may refl...81%Sentence meanings do not determine truth-conditions.80%Sentence meaning does not simply combine with facts to determine truth...79%When one reading of an expression entails another, the apparent ambigu...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: ambiguity
    View source passageHide passage
    Of course, given what has been discussed, this looks to be more like a case of under-specificity, or simply ignorance of a word’s meaning (in 1787), not ambiguity. As the distinction has no real legal relevance in this case, it is ignored as it generally is in common parlance. 6. Ambiguity and Indexicality: Are They Easily Told Apart? In section 2 we looked at phenomena that were not the same as ambiguity; in this section, we look at a few cases in which we might have been wrong to tear them

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective