Abstract
In a series of recent articles Angelika Kratzer has argued that the standard account of modality along Kripkean lines is inadequate in order to represent context-dependent modals. In particular she argued that the standard account is unable to deliver a non-trivial account of modality capable of overcoming inconsistencies of the underlying conversational background. She also emphasized the difficulties of characterizing context-dependent conditionals. As a response to these inadequacies she offered a two-dimensional account of contextual modals. Two conversational backgrounds are essentially used in this characterization of contextual modality.
We show in this paper that Kratzer’s double relative models (with finite domains) are elementary equivalent to well known neighborhood models of normal modalities originally proposed by D. Scott [S] and R. Montague [M]. We also argue that neighborhood models can be also used to represent some (non-normal) graded modalities that are difficult to represent in her framework (like ‘it is likely that’ or ‘it is highly probable that’, etc). Finally we show that an extension of the neighborhood semantics of conditionals is able to capture some of her proposals concerning dyadic modals. DR models with infinite domains can be shown to be pointwise equivalent to neighborhood models, but they are not guaranteed to have relational counterparts. So DR models surpass the representational power of relational (Kripkean) models. Neighborhood representations are, nevertheless, always possible, making clear as well that the central feature of double relative modals is that they are capable of encoding two central aspects of context: its propositional content, and its dynamic properties (which in Kratzer’s models are represented via an ordering source).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arlo Costa, H.: First order extensions of classical systems of modal logic: The role of the Barcan schemas. Studia Logica 71, 87–118 (forthcoming 2002)
Arlo Costa, H., Pacuit, E.: First order classical modal logic. Technical Report No. CMU-PHIL-164, Carnegie Mellon University (2004); An abbreviated version is forthcoming in TARK X
Ben-David, S., Ben-Eliyahu, R.: A Modal Logic for Subjective Default Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 116, 217–236 (2000)
Chellas, B.: Modal logic: An introduction. Cambridge UP, Cambridge (1980)
Kratzer, A.: Modality. In: von Stechow, A., Wunderlich, D. (eds.) Semantik. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenossischen Forschung, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 639–650 (1991)
Kratzer, A.: What ’must’ and ’can’ must and can mean. Linguistics and Philosophy 1(3), 337–356 (1977)
Levi, I.: For the sake of the argument: Ramsey test conditionals, Inductive Inference, and Nonmonotonic reasoning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)
Lewis, D.: Counterfactuals. Blackwell, Malden (1973)
Montague, R.: Pragmatics. Contemporary Philosophy, La Nuova Italia Editrice, 101–121 (1968)
Sen, A.: Non-Binary Choice and Preference. In: Rationality and Freedom. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Scott, D.: Advice on modal logic. Philosophical Problems in Logic, 143–173 (1970)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Costa, H.A., Taysom, W. (2005). Contextual Modals. In: Dey, A., Kokinov, B., Leake, D., Turner, R. (eds) Modeling and Using Context. CONTEXT 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 3554. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11508373_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11508373_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-26924-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-31890-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)