Skip to main content

Presupposition

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 167))

Abstract

To presuppose something is to take it for granted in a way that contrasts with asserting it. For example, if one assertively utters (1a) It was Sam who broke the typewriter. one presupposes that the typewriter was broken and asserts that Sam was the one who did it. Similarly, if one assertively utters (2a) John is going to drop out of school again. one presupposes that he has dropped out of school before and asserts that he will drop out in the future. In each case, the speaker commits himself both to that which he presupposes and to that which he asserts. However. there are important differences between the two.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Atlas, J. D.: 1977, ‘Negation, ambiguity, and presuppositions’, Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 321–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J. and J. Perry: 1983, Situations and Attitudes, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnellan, K. S.: 1966, ‘Reference and definite descriptions’, The Philosophical Review 75, 281–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnellan, K. S.: 1978, ‘Speaker reference, descriptions and anaphora’, in P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York, pp. 47–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frege, G.: 1891, ‘Function and concept’, in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.) [1952].

    Google Scholar 

  • Frege, G.: 1892a, ‘On concept and object’, in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.) [1952].

    Google Scholar 

  • Frege, G.: 1892b, ‘On sense and reference’, in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.) [1952].

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G.: 1979, Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geach, P. and M. Black (eds.): 1952, Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I.: 1982, The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, I.: 1983, ‘On the projection problem for presuppositions’, in M. Barlow, D. P. Flickinger, and M. T. Wescoat (eds.), Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Volume 2, Stanford Linguistics Association, Stanford, California, pp. 114–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, L.: 1969, “A presuppositional analysis of ‘only’ and ‘even’”, in R. Binnick. A. Davison, G. Green, and J. Morgan (eds.), Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago Linguistics Society, pp. 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, H.: 1968, Tense Logic and the Theory of Linear Order, Doctoral dissertation, U.C.L.A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, D.: 1977, ‘Demonstratives’, unpublished manuscript, U.C.L.A., Dept. of Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, L.: 1974, ‘Presupposition and linguistic context’, Theoretical Linguistics 1, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, L. and S. Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional implicature’, in Ch.-K. Oh and D. Dineen (eds.), Syntax and Semantics II: Presupposition, Academic Press, New York, pp. 1–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempson, R.: 1975, Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kripke, S.: 1975, ‘Outline of a theory of truth’, The Journal of Philosophy 72,690–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kripke, S.: 1979, ‘Speaker’s reference and semantic reference’, in P. French, T. Uehling, and H. Wettstein (eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in the Philosophy of Language. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp. 6–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1979, ‘Scorekeeping in a language game’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 8, 339–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T.: 1984, ‘Assertion, denial, and the liar paradox’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 13. 137–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B.: 1905, ‘On denoting’, Mind 14,479–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, N. U.: 1982, ‘Assertion and incomplete definite descriptions’, Philosophical Studies 42,37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, N. U.: 1986, Frege’s Puzzle, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1979, ‘A projection problem for speaker presuppositions’, Linguistic Inquiry 10, 623–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1982, ‘How presuppositions are inherited: A solution to the projection problem’, Linguistic Inquiry 13, 483–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1985, ‘Truth, paradox, and partially defined predicates’, unpublished manuscript Princeton University, Dept. of Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1986, ‘Incomplete definite descriptions’, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 27. 349–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soames, S.: 1987, ‘Direct reference, propositional attitudes, and semantic content’, Philosophical Topics 15, 47–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R.: 1972, ‘Pragmatics’, in D. Davidson and G. Harman (eds.), Semantics of Natural Language, Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 380–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R.: 1973, ‘Presuppositions’, Journal of Philosophical Logic 2,447–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stalnaker, R.: 1974, ‘Pragmatic presuppositions’, in M. K. Munitz and P. K. Unger (eds.), Semantics and Philosophy, New York University Press, New York, pp. 197–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. F.: 1950, ‘On Referring’, Mind 59,320–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strawson, P. F.: 1952, Introduction to Logical Theory, Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomason, R. H.: 1983, ‘Accommodation, conversational planning, and implicature’, unpublished manuscript, Dept. of Linguistics, University of Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wettstein, H.: 1981, ‘Demonstrative reference and definite descriptions’, Philosophical Studies 40,241–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D.: 1975, Presuppositions and Non-Truth-Conditional Semantics, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 D. Reidel Publishing Company

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Soames, S. (1989). Presupposition. In: Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Synthese Library, vol 167. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1171-0_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1171-0_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7021-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-1171-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics