Skip Navigation



Journal of Logic and Computation Advance Access published online on July 11, 2007

Journal of Logic and Computation, doi:10.1093/logcom/exm003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/2/257    most recent
exm003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pollard, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author, 2007. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Original papers

Hyperintensions

Carl Pollard

Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.

E-mail: pollard{at}ling.ohio-state.edu

Received 5 February 2006.


   Abstract

Standard possible worlds semantics has been known from the start to have a problem with granularity: for a wide range of natural-language (NL) entailment patterns, not enough meaning distinctions are available to make predictions consistent with robust intuitions. Though numerous solutions have been proposed, often of great ingenuity and technical sophistication, none of these has gained widespread acceptance. As a result, most semanticists have made a practical decision to work in a framework known to have dubious foundations and leave the foundational problems to mathematical logicians. Here, a new approach is proposed which may be simple enough and conservative enough to be practical for working empirical and computational semanticists. More specifically, I show how the use of a higher-order logic with definable subtypes leads to a novel and surprisingly straightforward solution of the granularity problem. I also call attention to a hitherto unnoticed problem in standard approaches to NL semantics having to do with non-principal ultrafilters and show why it does not arise under my proposal. The two main technical innovations that drive the proposal are (i) axiomatizing NL entailment as a preorder (as opposed to an order) on the set of (primitive) propositions, and (ii) defining worlds as certain sets of propositions (viz. ultrafilters). These innovations provide just the tools we need to develop a formally explicit theory of hyperintensions, 1 mathematical models of Fregean senses of a finer granularity than the familiar intensions (functions to extensions from worlds, where the worlds in turn are theoretical primitives) of mainstream Kripke/Montague-inspired NL semantics.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.