Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data
Montague, R.
 
Books on Amazon
Ambiguity Hintikka I 106
Quantification/quantifiers/ambiguity/any/HintikkaVsMontague: on the whole, the Montague semantics show how ambiguity arises through the interplay of quantifiers and intensional expressions. E.g.
(12) A woman loves every man.
(13) John is looking for a dog.

HintikkaVsMontague: explains only why certain expressions can be ambiguous, but not which are actually ambiguous. He generally predicts too many ambiguities. For he is not concerned with the grammatical principles, which often resolve ambiguities with quantifiers.

Scope/Hintikka: the scope determines the logical order.
Quantifier/Quantification/everyone/he/Montague/Hintikka: E.g.
(14) If he makes an effort, he will be happy.
(15) If everyone makes an effort, he will be happy.
Problem: in English, "if" has precedence with respect to "everyone" so that "everyone" in (15) cannot precede the "he" as a pronoun ("pronominalize").
---
I 107
HintikkaVsMontague: we need additional rules for the order of application of the rules.

Hin I
Jaakko and Merrill B. Hintikka
The Logic of Epistemology and the Epistemology of Logic Dordrecht 1989

W I
J. Hintikka/M. B. Hintikka
Untersuchungen zu Wittgenstein Frankfurt 1996


> Counter arguments against Montague



back to list view | > Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-03-29