Advertisement

Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects of Frege’s Approach to Fictional Discourse

  • Todor PolimenovEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Nordic Wittgenstein Studies book series (NRWS, volume 3)

Abstract

In many places in his works Frege co mes to speak of fiction. Sometimes he appeals to it to get the background against which to draw the semantic boundaries of his logical investigations. Sometimes he gives examples from fiction to clarify some specific relations between his semantic concepts. It is worth analyzing Frege’s remarks on fiction in order to see if they contain insights that let us elaborate a Fregean definition of fictional discourse. It is shown that they not just negatively say what fictional discourse is not, but also do indicate what it is. Furthermore, it is important to distinguish between semantic and pragmatic features of Frege’s view of fiction. The pragmatic ones, it is argued, anticipate some basic insights of a speech-act theoretical approach to fictional discourse. In addition the paper explores what Frege would tell us about the ontological status of fictional objects if the truth conditions of statements about them are taken into consideration in a Fregean manner.

Keywords

Fictional discourse Fictional objects Frege Illocutionary force Reference Sense 

References

  1. Aschenbrenner, K. (1968). Implications of Frege’s philosophy of language for literature. The British Journal of Aesthetics, 8, 319–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Church, A. (1951). The need for abstract entities in semantic analysis. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 80, 100–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Church, A. (1956). Introduction to mathematical logic: Vol. 1. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Dummett, M. (1973/1981). Frege: Philosophy of language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Frege, G. (1980). Philosophical and mathematical correspondence. G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), B. McGuinness (Ed.) of the English Trans., H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Frege, G. (1884/1950). The foundations of arithmetic: A logico-mathematical inquiry into the concept of number. J. L. Austin (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Frege, G. (1891/1980). Letter to Husserl (24.05). In G. Frege, Philosophical and mathematical correspondence (pp. 61–64). G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Frege, G. (1892a/1984). On sense and meaning. In G. Frege, Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy (pp. 157–177). B. McGuiness (Ed.), M. Black, et al. (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. [SB]Google Scholar
  9. Frege, G. (1892b/1979). [Comments on sense and meaning]. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 118–125). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Frege, G. (1897/1979). Logic. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 126–151). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Frege, G. (1899/1979). On Euclidian geometry. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 167–169). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Frege, G. (1902/1980). Letter to Russell (18.12). In G. Frege, Philosophical and mathematical correspondence (pp. 152–154). G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Frege, G. (1904/1980). Letter to Russell (13.11). In G. Frege, Philosophical and mathematical correspondence (pp. 160–166). G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Frege, G. (1906a/1979). Introduction to logic. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 185–196). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  15. Frege, G. (1906b/1979). A brief survey of my logical doctrines. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 197–202). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  16. Frege, G. (1914a/1979). Logic in mathematics. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 203–250). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Frege, G. (1914b/1980). Letter to Jourdain (undated). In G. Frege, Philosophical and mathematical correspondence (pp. 78–80). G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  18. Frege, G. (1915/1979). My basic logical insights. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 251–252). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  19. Frege, G. (1979). Posthumous writings. H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, & F. Kaulback (Eds.), B. McGuinness (Ed.) of the English Trans. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Frege, G. (1917/1980). Letter to Dingler (06.02). In G. Frege, Philosophical and mathematical correspondence (pp. 19–23). G. Gabriel, H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, C. Thiel, & A. Veraart (Eds.), H. Kaal (Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Frege, G. (1918/1984). Logical investigations. Part I: Thoughts. In G. Frege, Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy (pp. 351–372). B. McGuiness (Ed.), M. Black, et al. (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  22. Frege, G. (1919a/1984). Logical investigations. Part II: Negation. In G. Frege, Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy (pp. 373–389). B. McGuiness (Ed.), M. Black, et al. (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Frege, G. (1919b/1979). [Notes for Ludwig Darmstaedter]. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 253–257). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. Frege, G. (1923/1984). Logical investigations. Part III: Compound thoughts. In G. Frege, Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy (pp. 390–406). B. McGuiness (Ed.), M. Black, et al. (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  25. Frege, G. (1924/1979). Sources of knowledge of mathematics and the mathematical natural sciences. In G. Frege, Posthumous writings (pp. 267–274). H. Hermes, F. Kambartel, F. Kaulback (Eds.), P. Long & R. White (Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Frege, G. (1984). Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy. B. McGuiness (Ed.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Gabriel, G. (1970). Frege über semantische Eigenschaften der Dichtung. Linguistische Berichte, 8, 10–17.Google Scholar
  28. Gabriel, G. (1983/1991). Über Bedeutung in der Literatur: Zur Möglichkeit ästhetischer Erkenntnis. In G. Gabriel (Ed.), Zwischen Logik und Literatur: Erkenntnisformen von Dichtung, Philosophie und Wissenschaft (pp. 2–18). Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar
  29. Gabriel, G. (1987/1993). Fictional objects? A “Fregean” response to Terence Parsons. Modern Logic, 3, 367–375. Trans. of Gabriel, G. (1987). “Sachen gibt’s, die gibt’s gar nicht.” Sind literarische Figuren fiktive Gegenstände? Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 9, 67–76.Google Scholar
  30. Gabriel, G. (1991). Der Logiker als Metaphoriker: Freges philosophische Rhetorik. In G. Gabriel (Ed.), Zwischen Logik und Literatur: Erkenntnisformen von Dichtung, Philosophie und Wissenschaft (pp. 65–88). Stuttgart: Metzler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Künne, W. (1995). Fiktion ohne fiktive Gegenstände: Prolegomenon zu einer Fregeanischen Theorie der Fiktion. In J. L. Brandl, A. Hieke, & P. M. Simons (Eds.), Metaphysik: Neue Zugänge zu alten Fragen (pp. 141–161). Bonn: Akademia Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Lewis, D. (1978). Truth in fiction. American Philosophical Quarterly, 15, 37–46.Google Scholar
  33. Moore, G. E. (1933). Imaginary objects. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume, 12, 55–70.Google Scholar
  34. Parsons, T. (1975). A Meinongian analysis of fictional objects. Grazer Philosophische Studien, 1, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Parsons, T. (1980). Nonexistent objects. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Parsons, T. (1982). Fregean theories of fictional objects. Topoi, 1, 81–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Polimenov, T. (2013). Teile des Sinns und Teile der Bedeutung. Wismarer Frege-Reihe, 2, 11–31.Google Scholar
  38. Ryle, G. (1933). Imaginary objects. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volume, 12, 18–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Searle, J. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Searle, J. (1975/1979). The logical status of fictional discourse. In J. Searle (Ed.), Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts (pp. 58–75). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Textor, M. (2011). Sense-only-signs: Frege on fictional proper names. Grazer Philosophische Studien, 82, 375–400.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sofia UniversitySofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations