0
EN
1
المرجع الالكتروني للمعلوماتية

Grammar

Tenses

Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous

Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous

Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous

Parts Of Speech

Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns

Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs

Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs

Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective

Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns

Pre Position

Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition

Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions

Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions

Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences

Clauses

Part of Speech

Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners

Direct and Indirect speech

Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics

Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced

Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment

قم بتسجيل الدخول اولاً لكي يتسنى لك الاعجاب والتعليق.

Definite descriptions

المؤلف:  Nick Riemer

المصدر:  Introducing Semantics

الجزء والصفحة:  C6-P213

2026-05-20

27

+

-

20

Definite descriptions

In this section we consider an important application of logical principles to the analysis of natural language, the theory of definite descriptions proposed by Bertrand Russell (1905), one of the originators of the logical formalism introduced in this chapter. Definite descriptions are noun phrases like those in (106):

Definite descriptions are singular terms: they refer to a single, specific individual. (In this they contrast to what Russell (1949: 214) called ambiguous descriptions, which contain the indefinite article and do not refer to a single specific individual: a President of Iraq, a Chancellor of Germany.) Since Frege, the need for a formal logical analysis of definite descriptions had been keenly felt. Frege himself treated definite descriptions as referring expressions, and distinguished between the referent of a definite description and its sense (see Chapter 3). Thus, the definite descriptions in (107) all have a sense, but they do not have any reference, since there is no individual which they pick out:

Russell proposed a different treatment. According to him, definite descriptions like those in (106) and (107) are not actually understood as referring expressions at all: in fact, their logical structure is quantificational. Russell treated any sentence containing a definite description as equivalent to a quantificational sentence. For example, the sentence The King of France is bald is interpreted in the following way:

(109) reads as follows: ‘there is an x, such that x is the King of France, and for all ys, if y is the King of France, then y is x, and x is bald’. In the formula, ‘( x) (K(x) . . . ’ asserts the existence of an individual, the King of France. This is what we can call the existence clause. ‘( y) (K(y) ) y = x)’ says that every individual who is the King of France is x: in other words, there is only one King of France; this is the uniqueness clause. The last section, B(x), adds the information that the King of France is bald.

As another example, consider the representation of the proposition the Chancellor of Germany is a woman:

Russell’s analysis explains how definite descriptions can be understood even when we do not know the identity of their referent. As long as we understand the meaning of the predicates involved, we can understand the definite description, even if, as in (108), there is not, in fact, any individual to whom the examples refer.

QUESTION Give equivalent analyses of the following expressions:

 The emperor of China is a child.

 The only house in Mosman is for sale.

 The law is an ass.

Russell’s analysis of definite descriptions has been highly influential and has stimulated wide debate. One of the most influential criticisms is due to P. F. Strawson (1950), who argued against both the existence and uniqueness clauses of Russell’s analysis. According to Strawson, a speaker’s use of a definite description does not assert that anything exists, as it does in Russell’s analysis; rather, it presupposes (Strawson actually uses the term ‘implies’) this existence. Thus, if I utter a statement like ‘The King of France is angry’, I am not explicitly committing myself to the existence of an individual, the King of France; I am simply taking his existence for granted, and not putting it forward as a matter of discussion. Strawson also criticized the uniqueness clause: to say ‘the table is covered with books’, for example, is certainly not to claim that there is one and only one table. (Russell might reply, of course, that the table is in fact unique within the universe of dis course in question: if uttered, for example, in a room with only one table; if it were not, it would be necessary to specify which table was meant.)

لا توجد تعليقات بعد

ما رأيك بالمقال : كن أول من يعلق على هذا المحتوى

اخر الاخبار

اشترك بقناتنا على التلجرام ليصلك كل ما هو جديد