From 92b29e26e2757114e378add97be8ccc111d3fea0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: chris Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2015 10:23:16 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 1/1] --- topics/_week6_plexy.mdwn | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/topics/_week6_plexy.mdwn b/topics/_week6_plexy.mdwn index caf3e69d..b93c29eb 100644 --- a/topics/_week6_plexy.mdwn +++ b/topics/_week6_plexy.mdwn @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@ meaning. more complicated expression that, he argues, refers to Plexy, but this nicety is not crucial to our discussion here.) +## Types to the rescue + Kaplan's solution is, in effect, to impose a type system on his grammar in such a way that structured meanings cannot be confused with the referent of a directly-referential term. He suggests that the @@ -65,6 +67,8 @@ class of objects that a directly referential term can refer to, and the class of objects that can serve as the complex structure corresponding to a DP that is not directly referential. +## Motivating Maybe + Kaplan goes on to use this solution to attack a different problem, the problem of non-referring names. Russell supposed that if a name had no referent (e.g., *Santa*), a sentence containing that name would -- 2.11.0