Skip to main content

Predication, and What is Said

  • Chapter
What is Said

Part of the book series: Philosophical Studies Series ((PSSP,volume 49))

  • 88 Accesses

Abstract

In the previous chapter a theory of speaker’s reference based on the intentions of the speaker was developed. Completion of the story about what is said requires a companion theory of predication — referring to something is after all generally not all there is to saying something — and a demonstration of how these theories yield the desired result. Let us start then with predication. Happily, many of the considerations that occupied us in the previous chapter will apply here as well, which will allow the discussion to be somewhat less detailed than would otherwise be required.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Gareth Evans used this example to suggest that it poses a problem for the causal theory of names sketched by Kripke. I agree with this, but it is not relevant to our present concerns. See Evans, “The Causal Theory of Names”, in S. Schwartz (ed.), Naming, Necessity, and Natural Kinds, pp. 192–215.

    Google Scholar 

  2. “Names and Intentionality”, p. 199.

    Google Scholar 

  3. “Referential Shifts”, p. 136.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Grice, “Utterer’s Meaning and Intentions”, pp. 147–49.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Stampe, “Toward a Causal Theory of Linguistic Representation”; Bach and Harnish, Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. I do not mean to suggest that any of these people would approve of my adaptation.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bach and Harnish, ibid., p. 15

    Google Scholar 

  7. Salmon, ibid., pp. 103–105. It is important to note that while Salmon claims that someone might not recognize the proposition that e.g. Mr. Jones is alluring, he also insists that this proposition is completely understood. This notion of understanding but not recognizing a proposition (as say the same as a previously entertained one) is the key element in his solution to the puzzles to which his book is devoted (see esp. Chapter 8, and pp. 169–70, n. 4).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ibid., p. 109.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Peter Strawson, The Bounds of Sense, p. 138.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ibid., pp. 137–38.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bertolet, R. (1990). Predication, and What is Said. In: What is Said. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 49. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2061-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2061-3_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-7425-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-2061-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics