Abstract
It has been known for decades that Montague’s (1974 [1970]) possible-worlds semantics, which follows Kripke 1963 in treating worlds as unanalyzed primitives and propositions as sets of worlds, does not provide enough meaning distinctions to make correct predictions about a wide range of natural-language entailment patterns. This granularity problem, as it has come to be known, has many dimensions, of which the best known is that two declarative sentences which entail each other must express the same proposition. This is because entailment is modelled by the subset inclusion relation on the powerset of the set of propositions, and that relation is irretrievably antisymmetric. The most notorious consequence of this antisymmetry of entailment is the so-called logical omniscience problem, that (assuming knowledge is a relation between individuals and propositions) anyone who knows at least one necessary truth (e.g. that s/he is self-identical, or that two is even) must know every necessary truth, even an unresolved mathematical conjecture or its denial (whichever is true). Thus, e.g. if Paris Hilton knows that Paris Hilton is Paris Hilton, then she must also know that every nontrivial zero of the zeta-function has real part 1/2, if that is indeed the case, or else she must know that this is not the case, if indeed it is not. In short, it seems to be a consequence of MS that a celebrity hotel heiress devoted to parties and shopping knows whether the Riemann Hypothesis is true. This is just one of the unsavory consequences of MS.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Adams, R.: Theories of Actuality. Noûs 8, 211–231 (1974)
Barwise, J., Perry, J.: Situations and Attitudes. Bradford Books, Cambridge (1983)
Carnap, R.: Meaning and Necessity. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1947)
Chierchia, G., Turner, R.: Semantics and property theory. Linguistics and Philosophy 11, 261–302 (1988)
Fox, C., Lappin, S.: Foundations of Intensional Semantics. Blackwell, Oxford (2005)
Gallin, D.: Intensional and Higher Order Modal Logic. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1975)
Groenendijk, J., Stokhof, M.: Studies on the Semantics of Questions and the Pragmatics of Answers. Ph. D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam (1984)
Hamblin, C.: Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language 10, 41–53 (1973)
Henkin, L.: Completeness in the Theory of Types. Journal of Symbolic Logic 15, 81–91 (1950)
Johnstone, P.: Stone Spaces. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)
Jónsson, B., Tarski, A.: Boolean algebras with operators, part 1. American Journal of Mathematics 73(4), 891–939 (1951)
Karttunen, L.: Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 3–44 (1977)
Kripke, S.: A completeness theorem in modal logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 24, 1–14 (1959)
Kripke, S.: Semantic analysis of modal logic I: normal modal propositional calculi. Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 9, 67–96 (1963)
Lambek, J., Scott, P.: Introduction to Higher-Order Categorical Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1986)
Montague, R.: The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English. In: Thomason, R. (ed.) Formal Philosophy: Selected Papers of Richard Montague, pp. 247–270. Yale University Press, New Haven (1974)
Muskens, R.: Sense and the computation of reference. Linguistics and Philosophy 28(4), 473–504 (2005)
Pollard, C.: Nonlocal dependencies via variable contexts. In: Muskens, R. (ed.) Workshop on New Directions in Type-Theoretic Grammar. ESSLLI 2007, Dublin (2007); Revised and extended version under review for a special issue of Journal of Logic, Language, and Information
Pollard, C.: Hyperintensions. Journal of Logic and Computation 18(2), 257–282 (2008)
Pollard, C.: Covert movement in logical grammar. In: ESSLLI 2008 Workshop on Ludics and Symmetric Calculi, Hamburg, August 2008 (submitted)
Pollard, C.: Ms. 1. Stone dual semantics for natural language. Ohio State University and Universitat Rovira i Virgili. In: Semantics in Paris 2: Semantics beyond Set Theory, CNRS/ENS, Paris, October 2007 (unpublished paper)
Pollard, C.: Ms. 2. What do interrogative sentences refer to? Ohio State University, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, and INRIA-Lorraine. In: Workshop on Reference to Abstract Objects, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, March 2008 (unpublished paper)
Pollard, C.: 1. The whether underground. In: Workshop on Ludics, Dialogue, Game Theory, and Questions, Autrans, France, May 2008 (in preparation)
Pollard, C.: 2. Continuations for comparatives. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 19, Columbus, April 2009 (submitted)
Stalnaker, R.: Inquiry. Bradford Books/MIT Press, Cambridge (1984)
Stone, M.: The theory of representation for boolean algebras. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 40, 37–111 (1936)
Stone, M.: Topological representation of distributive lattices and Brouwerian logics. Časopis pešt. mat. fys. 67, 1–25 (1937)
Thomason, R.: A model theory for propositional attitudes. Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 47–70 (1980)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Pollard, C. (2008). Hyperintensional Questions. In: Hodges, W., de Queiroz, R. (eds) Logic, Language, Information and Computation. WoLLIC 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 5110. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69937-8_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69937-8_24
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-69936-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-69937-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)