Abstract
AbstractIn this paper, we will present an analysis of the Oswald example (‘If Oswald did not shot Kennedy, then somebody else did’/‘If Oswald had not shot Kennedy, then somebody else would have’) that takes a closer look at the antecedents of the Oswald minimal pair. We will argue that diverging foci in the antecedents of the Oswald example result in different truth conditions of the conditionals, explaining the difference in truth values between the two sentences. Although the explanation will incorporate aspects of Stalnaker’s theory of conditionals, it will go beyond Stalnaker’s analysis of the Oswald example on one crucial point. The difference in focus assignments between the two sentences will not be explained by a difference in appropriateness conditions between indicative and subjunctive mood. Instead, the diverging foci will stem from pragmatic requirements imposed on the presuppositions of indicative and subjunctive antecedents. This analysis will be further confirmed by extending it to similar examples with ascriptions of hopes and wishes, pointing towards a more clear-cut separation of conditionality and the effect of the Oswald example.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Social Sciences,Philosophy
Reference54 articles.
1. Adams, E. W. (1970). Subjunctive and indicative conditionals. Foundations of Language, 6, 89–94.
2. Arregui, A. (2007). When aspect matters: The case of would-conditionals. Natural Language Semantics, 15(3), 221–264.
3. Arregui, A. (2009). On similarity in counterfactuals. Linguistics and Philosophy, 32(3), 245–278.
4. Barker, S. J. (1998). Predetermination and tense probabilism. Analysis, 58(4), 290–296.
5. Beaver, D. I., & Clark, B. Z. (2008). Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献