Title: | Comparing the derivation of modal domains and strengthened meanings |
---|
Authors: | ID Trinh, Tue (Author) |
Files: | https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-25894-7_8
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-25894-7_8
|
---|
Language: | English |
---|
Work type: | Unknown |
---|
Typology: | 1.08 - Published Scientific Conference Contribution |
---|
Organization: | UNG - University of Nova Gorica
|
---|
Abstract: | The derivation of strengthened meanings as proposed by Bar-Lev and Fox (2017, 2020) and the derivation of modal domains as proposed by Kratzer (1977, 1981, 1991) both involve an “inclusion” step of assigning true to as many propositions in a given set as possible. In the case of strengthened meanings, this set contains the scalar alternatives. In the case of modal domains, it contains the propositions in the ordering source. In this note, we explicate what is common and what is distinct between the two inclusion procedures. We then point out that the formal distinction makes no empirical difference for the cases of strengthened meaning so far considered in the literature. We conjecture that this fact holds generally for all cases of strengthened meaning. |
---|
Keywords: | modality, exhaustification, innocent inclusion, cell identification |
---|
Publication status: | Published |
---|
Publication version: | Version of Record |
---|
Year of publishing: | 2023 |
---|
Number of pages: | Str. 156-166 |
---|
PID: | 20.500.12556/RUNG-9651 |
---|
COBISS.SI-ID: | 221473795 |
---|
UDC: | 81'1 |
---|
DOI: | 10.1007/978-3-031-25894-7_8 |
---|
NUK URN: | URN:SI:UNG:REP:OUFUS9IH |
---|
Publication date in RUNG: | 09.01.2025 |
---|
Views: | 211 |
---|
Downloads: | 2 |
---|
Metadata: | |
---|
:
|
Copy citation |
---|
| | | Average score: | (0 votes) |
---|
Your score: | Voting is allowed only for logged in users. |
---|
Share: | |
---|
Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click
on the title to get all document metadata. |