A Plea against Monsters

in Grazer Philosophische Studien
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Inspired by Schlenker’s (2003) seminal Plea for Monsters, linguists have been analyzing every occurrence of a shifted indexical by postulating a monstrous operator. The author’s aim in this paper is to show that Kaplan’s (1989) original strategy of explaining apparent shifting in terms of a quotational use/mention distinction offers a much more intuitive, parsimonious and empirically superior analysis of many of these phenomena, including direct–indirect switches in Ancient Greek, role shift in signed languages, free indirect discourse in literary narratives, and mixed quotation.

A Plea against Monsters

in Grazer Philosophische Studien

Sections

References

AnandPranav. 2006. “ De De Se.” PhD diss. mit. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/37418

AnandPranav and NevinsAndrew. 2004. “ Shifty Operators in Changing Contexts.” Semantics and Linguistic Theory (salt)14:2037. http://elanguage.net/journals/salt/article/view/14.20.

BanfieldAnn. 1973. “ Narrative Style and the Grammar of Direct and Indirect Speech.” Foundations of Language10 (1): 139.

———. 1982. Unspeakable Sentences: Narration and Representation in the Language of Fiction. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

BaryCorien and MaierEmar. 2003. “ Ancient Greek Monsters.” Slides Szklarska Poreba. https://db.tt/BnxOgASB.

CappelenHerman and LeporeErnest. 1997. “ Varieties of Quotation.” Mind106 (423): 429450. doi:

———. 2012. “ Quotation.” Edited by Edward N Zalta. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2012/entries/quotation/.

ChierchiaGennaro. 1989. “ Anaphora and Attitudes De Se.” In Semantics and contextual expression. Dordrecht: Foris.

ClarkHerbert and GerrigRichard. 1990. “ Quotations as Demonstrations.” Language66 (4): 764805.

DavidsonDonald. 1979. “ Quotation.” Theory and Decision11 (1): 2740. doi:10. 1007/BF00126690.

DavidsonKathryn. 2015. “ Quotation, Demonstration, and Iconicity.” Linguistics and Philosophy38 (6): 477520. doi:

BrabanterDe Philippe. 2010. “ The Semantics and Pragmatics of Hybrid Quotations.” Language and Linguistics Compass4 (2): 107120. doi:10.1111/j. 1749-818X.2009.00185.x.

EckardtRegine. 2014. The Semantics of Free Indirect Speech. How Texts Let You Read Minds and Eavesdrop.Leiden: Brill. pmid: 25018960.

FludernikMonika. 1995. The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction: The Linguistic Representation of Speech and Consciousness. London: Routledge.

KaplanDavid. 1989. “ Demonstratives.” In Themes from Kaplan edited by AlmogJosephPerryJohn and WettsteinHoward481614. New York: Oxford University Press.

KoevTodor. Forthcoming. “ Quotational Indefinites.” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory.

KripkeSaul. 1980. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Lillo-MartinDiane. 1995. “ The Point of View Predicate in American Sign Language.” In Language Gesture and Space edited by EmmoreyK and ReillyJ S155170. Mahwah, nj: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

MaierEmar. 2014a. “ Language Shifts in Free Indirect Discourse.” Journal of Literary Semantics43 (2): 143167. doi:

———. 2014b. “ Mixed Quotation: The Grammar of Apparently Transparent Opacity.” Semantics and Pragmatics7 (7): 167. doi:

———. 2014c. “ Pure Quotation.” Philosophy Compass 9 no. 9 (September): 615630. doi: 10.1111/phc3.12149.

———. 2015a. “ Quotation and Unquotation in Free Indirect Discourse.” Mind and Language30 (3): 235273. doi: 10.1111/mila.12083.

———. 2015b. “ Reported Speech in the Transition from Orality to Literacy.” Glotta91 (1): 152170. doi:10.13109/glot.2015.91e.1.152.

MaierEmar. Forthcoming. “The Pragmatics of Attraction: Explaining Unquotation in Direct and Free Indirect Discourse.” In The Semantics and Pragmatics of Quotation edited by Paul Saka and Michael Johnson. Berlin: Springer. Accessed May 3 2016. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002966.

PaginPeter and WesterståhlDag. 2011. “ Pure Quotation and General Compositionality.” Linguistics and Philosophy33 (5): 381415. doi:

PottsChristopher. 2007. “ The Dimensions of Quotation.” In Direct Compositionality edited by BarkerChris and JacobsonPauline405431. New York: Oxford University Press.

QuerJosep. 2005. “ Context Shift and Indexical Variables in Sign Languages.” Semantics and Linguistic Theory (salt)15:152168.

———. 2011. “ Reporting and Quoting in Signed Discourse.” In Understanding Quotation edited by BrendelElkeMeibauerJörg and SteinbachMarkus277302. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

RabernBrian. 2013. “ Monsters in Kaplan’s Logic of Demonstratives.” Philosophical Studies164 (2): 393404. doi:

RajićLjubiša. 2008. “ Mixing Oratio Recta and Oratio Obliqua: A Sign of Literacy or Orality?” In Oral Art Forms and their Passage into Writing203208. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press.

RecanatiFrançois. 2000. Oratio Obliqua Oratio Recta. Cambridge: mit Press.

———. 2001. “ Open Quotation.” Mind 110 no. 439 (July): 637687. doi: 10.1093/mind/110.439.637.

———. 2008. “ Open Quotation Revisited.” Philosophical Perspectives22:443471. doi: 10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00153.x.

RiceKeren. 1986. “ Some Remarks on Direct and Indirect Discourse in Slave (Northern Athapaskan).” In Direct and Indirect Speech edited by CoulmasFlorian4776. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

RichmanGerald. 1986. “ Artful Slipping in Old English.” Neophilologus70 (2): 279291. doi: 10.1007/BF00553322.

SakaPaul. 2013. “ Quotation.” Philosophy Compass8 (10): 935949. doi:

SchlenkerPhilippe. 1999. “Propositional Attitudes and Indexicality: A Cross-Categorial Approach.” PhD diss. mit. http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/9353.

———. 2003. “ A Plea for Monsters.” Linguistics and Philosophy26 (1): 29120. doi:

———. 2004. “ Context of Thought and Context of Utterance: A Note on Free Indirect Discourse and the Historical Present.” Mind and Language19 (3): 279304. doi:

———. 2011. “ Indexicality and De Se Reports.” In Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning edited by von HeusingerKlausMaienbornClaudia and PortnerPaul15611604. The Hague: De Gruyter.

———. Forthcoming(a). “Super Monsters I: Attitude and Action Role Shift in Sign Language.” Semantics and Pragmatics. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002069/.

———. Forthcoming(b). “ Super Monsters Ii: Role Shift, Iconicity and Quotation in Sign Language.” Semantics and Pragmatics. http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/002074.

ShanChung-chieh. 2011. “ The Character of Quotation.” Linguistics and Philosophy 33 no. 5 (May): 417443. doi: 10.1007/s10988-011-9085-6.

SharvitYael. 2008. “ The Puzzle of Free Indirect Discourse.” Linguistics and Philosophy31 (3): 353395. doi:

StokkeAndreas. 2013. “ Protagonist Projection.” Mind and Language 28 no. 2 (April): 204232. doi:

ZimmermannThomas Ede. 2007. “Mixed Quotations.” SlidesTübingen. http://web.uni-frankfurt.de/fb10/zimmermann/Tuebingen2007.pdf.

ZucchiSandro. 2004. “Monsters in the Visual Mode?” Ms. Milan. http://filosofia.dipafilo.unimi.it/~zucchi/NuoviFile/LISmonsters.pdf.

10

Slave Anand and Nevines 2004.

11

Slave Rice 1986.

12

Recanati 2001.

21

Pagin and Westerståhl (2011) argue that the pure quotation component that Potts’ account builds makes the account non-compositional but this subtlety need not concern us here.

22

Clark and Gerrig 1990.

26

Cappelen and Lepore 1997.

27

Maier 2014b.

28

De Brabanter 2010.

29

Maier 2014a.

31

Shan (2011) and Recanati (2008) come close to adopting this strategy. Consider for instance the following passage: “[(41a)] involves what I dubbed a language-shift: the words within the quotation marks are interpreted as belonging to the ‘language’ (idiolect) of the source and this affects not only their content but also their linguistic meaning or character. Yet as I pointed out in several places the two phenomena can be unified if we let the language spoken in a ­context be one of the coordinates of the context in question." Nonetheless for the reason mentioned in footnote 20 Recanati might object to this characterization pointing out that in his account the context shift is pragmatic or pre-semantic rather than semantic.

33

Recanati (2001) makes the same point confirming that we can’t simply take the quote in footnote 31 as an endorsement of supermonsters.

34

Kaplan 1989.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 10 10 10
Full Text Views 11 11 11
PDF Downloads 5 5 5
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0