Natural Language Semantics - Semantics Archive

180 Pages·2009·0.88 MB·English

X
X
X
X
X
Natural Language Semantics
A Naturalistic Approach
IanUnderwood
Athesissubmittedinfulfilmentofrequirementsforthedegreeof
DoctorofPhilosophy
to
SchoolofPhilosophy,PsychologyandLanguageSciences
UniversityofEdinburgh
April2009

Abstract
Within linguistics, the dominant truth-conditional approach to semantics belongs to the
Tarskian, model-theoretic tradition. Theories in this tradition offer an abstract, math-
ematical description of the truth conditions of natural language expressions in terms
of their correspondence with the world. This thesis takes issue with existing model-
theoretic accounts of quantification on the basis that the specific abstract relations that
theydescribecouldnotplausiblybemodelsofnaturallanguage-to-worldrelations.
Recentdecadeshaveseenmuchphilosophicalinterestinnaturalistictheoriesofreference
and mental content. In one sense, these theories address the above concern by trying to
identifysomethingnaturalisticforsemanticcorrespondencetoconsistin,suchascausal-
historical chains or ceteris paribus laws. In another sense, they fail to address the prob-
lem, since no account is given of either the semantic structure or the truth conditions of
eventhetiniestfragmentofanaturallanguage. Crucially,itisfarfromclearthatmodel-
theoretic semantics, in anything like its present form, can accommodate the solutions
proposedbynaturalistictheoriesofcontent. Ifcorrespondencetruthandnaturalismare
bothtoberetained,anewtheoryisneeded.
I begin by arguing that the class nominalism underlying model-theoretic semantics is
unsuited to this naturalistic project, and propose that a variant of Armstrong’s realist
metaphysic, incorporating Donald Baxter’s theory of aspects, provides the ideal ontol-
ogy. I revise and extend Baxter’s theory for a more complete and precise account of the
instantiation of properties and relations, and show that the theory of aspects allows for
anappealingtreatmentofbothnumbersandgeneralfacts.
Against the background of this realist metaphysic, and drawing on insights from natu-
ralistic theories of mental content, I propose an original theory of mentally represented
semantic structures and their truth-conditional analysis. Within this framework, I treat
thecoresemanticphenomenaofpredication,negation,conjunction,anddisjunction,and
devote considerable attention to relations. I also develop a detailed theory of quantifi-
cation, which includes a fully naturalistic account of both universal quantification and
numerals.
i
ii
Declaration
Iherebydeclarethatthisthesisisofmyowncompositionandthatitcontainsnomaterial
previouslysubmittedfortheawardofanyotherdegree. Theworkreportedinthisthesis
hasbeenexecutedbymyselfexceptwheredueacknowledgementismadeinthetext.
IanUnderwood
iii
iv
Acknowledgements
My deepest gratitude goes to my supervisors for their constant support and guidance
throughout this Ph.D., and for their extreme generosity with their time and energy. I
couldn’t have had a better, more dedicated principal supervisor than Ronnie Cann, and
Ibenefitedenormouslyfromhissemanticexpertiseandall-aroundgoodadvice. Ronnie
was encouraging and good humoured, and remained incredibly focused on getting me
todevelopmyearlyideasintoacompletethesis.
Pepa Toribio joined as my second supervisor to advise on issues in the philosophy of
mind and language. It was always a huge pleasure to discuss my ideas with Pepa and,
despite the flaws that I’ve failed to remedy, this thesis is much improved as a result of
ourmeetingsandnumerousemailexchanges. Severalofmythoughtswouldneverhave
madeitoutofmyheadandontothepagewithoutherpatientfeedback.
Dan Wedgwood was a great third supervisor. Several discussions that we had near the
beginning of the Ph.D. were integral to getting my thoughts straightened out. Dan was
always more than willing to help me out, and though we often disagreed on central
issues,thisthesishasbenefitedinmanywaysfromhissoundadvice.
I would like to thank Caroline Heycock and Nik Gisborne for their active participation
in my first year annual review. Thanks also to the other members of the Syntax and
SemanticsResearchGroupatEdinburgh.
I’vehadseveralinspiringinstructorsanddissertationsupervisorsinlinguisticsatDurham
andEssex. MyparticularthanksgotoBobBorsley,AndersHolmberg,andMaggieTaller-
man. I’m also grateful to the Department of Language and Linguistics at the University
ofEssexfortheirPostgraduateScholarship,whichfundedmyMAinSyntax.
During my time at Edinburgh, I was lucky to have the friendship of Alima Bucciantini,
Dan Krugman, Kaori Miura, Antje van Oosten, and Emi Sakamoto. I hope we manage
tostayintouch! Thankstoallthecommonroomregulars,andtothevariousnicepeople
I’ve shared an office with. I’m very grateful to Michael Bennett, Morag Brown, Eddie
Dubourg,andCedricMacMartinfortheirfriendlytechnicalsupport.
It should be abundantly clear from the text that the work of David Armstrong, Donald
Baxter, MichaelDevitt, FredDretske, JerryFodor, RuthMillikan, andvariousothershas
v
providedthefoundationfor,andotherwisehadagreatinfluenceon,mythinkingabout
issuesin metaphysics, semantics, and the philosophy of mind. It was a pleasure to read
them and to engage with their ideas. In particular, I would like to thank Donald Baxter
fortakingthe timetoreadandcommentonanearlydraftportionofChapter2. Thanks
alsotoJerryFodorforrespondingwithanswerstomyemailedquestions.
To my wife Dot, You know I couldn’t have managed this without you. Thank you for
holding down a job you hated so that I could get this finished. I love you with all my
heart!
IdedicatethisthesistomyparentsJackandMyra,withlove. Thankyouboth,forloving
meandencouragingmealways. ThanksDad,forcomingouttohelpmethroughthelast
twoweeksofwriting. Loveandthanks,also,tomysisterSarah.
ThisPh.D.wasfundedbyastudentshipfromtheArtsandHumanitiesResearchCouncil.
September2008
I’mextremelygratefultomyexaminersProfessorJamesR.HurfordandProfessorJosep
Macià, who provided such valuable feedback during the viva. This corrected version of
thethesishasparticularlybenefitedfromacomprehensivelistofcommentsandrequests
forminorrevisionfromProfessorMacià. Anyerrorsthatremainare,ofcourse,myown.
April2009
vi
Preface
I adhere to the following conventions throughout the thesis. Single quotes are used to
name or mention expressions. Italicised expressions name properties, or are used for
emphasis,butnevernameexpressionsorconcepts. Smallcapitalsareusedtonamecon-
cepts. Doublequotesareusedforcitationandscarequotes.
vii
viii