We argue for a new mode of interpretation for attributed attitudes, what we call de translato interpretation. De translato interpretation assigns a meaning to an expression based on the interpretation given to that expression by the attitude subject rather than that standardly given by the attributor (usually the speaker). We argue that this new mode of interpretation is distinct from but compatible with de dicto, de re and de qualitate interpretation. Formally, de translato interpretation is analyzed as introducing a modification in the language used for interpretation, where the modification alters the attributor’s language in such a way as to more closely approximate the presumed language of a perspective holder. Attitude predicates are taken to introduce the perspective of their subject as a parameter of interpretation for the clause they embed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger.
Cresswell, M., & von Stechow, A. (1982). De re belief generalized. Linguistics and Philosophy,5(4), 503–535.
Fodor, J. D. (1970). The linguistic description of opaque contexts. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Gettier, E. (1963). Is justified true belief knowledge? Analysis,23(6), 121–123.
Haas-Spohn, U. (1994). Versteckte Indexikalitä und subjektive Bedeutung. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tübingen.
Hintikka, J. (1962). Knowledge and belief. An introduction to the two notions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Kaplan, D. (1968). Quantifying in. Synthese,19(1–2), 178–214.
Lasersohn, P. (2005). Context dependence, disagreement, and predicates of personal taste. Linguistics and Philosophy,28(6), 643–686.
Lewis, D. (1979). Attitudes de dicto and de se. The Philosophical Review,88(4), 513–543.
Moltmann, F. (2003). Propositional attitudes without propositions. Synthese,135(4), 77–118.
Pearson, H. (2013). The sense of self: Topics in the semantics of de se expressions. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Percus, O. (2000). Constraints on some other variables in syntax. Natural Language Semantics,8(2), 173–229.
Perry, J. (1979). The problem of the essential indexical. Noûs,13(1), 3–21.
Quine, W. V. O. (1956). Quantifiers and propositional attitudes. The Journal of Philosophy,53(5), 177–187.
Quine, W. V. O. (1960). Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Russell, B. (1905). On denoting. Mind,14, 479–493.
Schlenker, P. (2003). A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy,26(1), 29–120.
Schwager, M. (2011). Speaking of qualities. In E. Cormany, S. lto & D. Lutz (Eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) (Vol. 19, pp. 395–412). New York: eLanguage.
Shan, C. (2010). The character of quotation. Linguistics and Philosophy,33(5), 417–443.
Stephenson, T. (2007). Towards a theory of subjective meaning. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
About this article
Cite this article
Tancredi, C., Sharvit, Y. Qualities and translations. Linguist and Philos 43, 303–343 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-019-09277-4
- Attitude ascription
- De re
- Attitude reports
- De qualitate
- De translato