“Llueve” Una polémica en torno a los constituyentes inarticulados

Abstract

The question about what an utterance literally says has raised two different answers: first, a response that appeals to context-derived elements to determine what has been said. On the other hand, a response that supports only the inclusion of elements linked to linguistic items. The first view is held by Recanati, Bach and Perry. The second one is held by Stanley, Szabó & Cappelen and Lepore. In this paper we will consider the contributions of Recanati and Stanley, who have held a heated debate where various examples which serve to support their proposals and refute the contrary views. One such example is raised by Recanati on the case of "it rains". In this paper we will analyze if that example actually refutes Stanley's position.

Keywords:

Constituyentes inarticulados

forma lógica

Recanati

Stanley

Unarticulated constituents

logical form

Recanati

Stanley

-

References

Camós, Francesc. “Sinsentidos: un análisis pragmático de los fracasos comunicativos”. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Granada, 2008. Impreso.

Perry, John. “Thought without representation”. The problem of the essential indexical and other essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. Print.

Recanati, François. Direct reference: From language to thought. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1993. Print.

---. “Unarticulated constituents”. Linguistics and Philosophy. Jun. 2002: 299-345. Print.

---. Literal meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.

---. “It’s raining (somewhere)”. Institut Nicod. Web. 2007 http://jeannicod.ccsd.cnrs.fr/index.php.

---. Truth-conditional pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.

Stanley, Jason. “Context and logical form”. Linguistics and Philosophy. Aug. 2000: 391-434. Print.

---. “Making it articulated”. Mind and language. Feb. 2002: 147-168. Print.