Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Presuppositions, again

Colonna Dahlman, Roberta LU (2019) In Philosophical Analysis 79. p.11-42
Abstract
Presupposition is surely one of the most debated notions in the linguistic and philosophical literature. Historically, there are two main theoretical approaches to presuppositions. According to the first one, the semantic view, presuppositions are semantic implications, that is, truth-conditional relations between propositions and statements. In this sense, presuppositions are considered properties of sentences and a presupposed proposition is a necessary condition for the truth of the presupposing statement. In the second approach, the pragmatic view, presuppositions are not properties of sentences but rather properties of speakers or of linguistic performances given a certain context of utterance. From this view, a presupposed... (More)
Presupposition is surely one of the most debated notions in the linguistic and philosophical literature. Historically, there are two main theoretical approaches to presuppositions. According to the first one, the semantic view, presuppositions are semantic implications, that is, truth-conditional relations between propositions and statements. In this sense, presuppositions are considered properties of sentences and a presupposed proposition is a necessary condition for the truth of the presupposing statement. In the second approach, the pragmatic view, presuppositions are not properties of sentences but rather properties of speakers or of linguistic performances given a certain context of utterance. From this view, a presupposed proposition is a condition for the felicitous utterance of the presupposing statement in a given context. Traditionally, it is assumed that semantic presuppositions differ from classical entailments, as presuppositions, unlike classical entailments, project under negation: if we compare a context of entailment to a context of presupposition, we should see that entailments, but not presuppositions, disappear under negation. This presentation aims to propose a revision of the semantic notion of presupposition. I argue that most standard cases of presuppositions are classical entailments. Moreover, I claim that all presuppositions that are classical entailments are also pragmatic presuppositions, while not all pragmatic presuppositions are also classical entailments. I contend that factive verbs offer a paradigmatic example of this distinction, as the factivity related to know is semantic, hence a classical entailment, whereas the factivity related to regret is merely pragmatic. This claim stands in contrast to Karttunen’s (1971) well-known analysis of factive verbs and his distinction between true factives (that is, emotive factives) and semifactives (that is, cognitive factives). (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
publication status
published
subject
host publication
Philosophical Insights into Pragmatics
series title
Philosophical Analysis
editor
Stalmaszczyk, Piotr
volume
79
pages
11 - 42
publisher
De Gruyter
external identifiers
  • scopus:85123704377
ISSN
2627-227X
2627-2288
ISBN
978-3-11-062376-5
978-3-11-062893-7
978-3-11-062633-9
DOI
10.1515/9783110628937-002
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
b1e8cdc6-aaa9-4187-8034-3dcfb803c7c0
date added to LUP
2020-09-17 19:16:19
date last changed
2024-06-27 20:21:58
@inbook{b1e8cdc6-aaa9-4187-8034-3dcfb803c7c0,
  abstract     = {{Presupposition is surely one of the most debated notions in the linguistic and philosophical literature. Historically, there are two main theoretical approaches to presuppositions. According to the first one, the semantic view, presuppositions are semantic implications, that is, truth-conditional relations between propositions and statements. In this sense, presuppositions are considered properties of sentences and a presupposed proposition is a necessary condition for the truth of the presupposing statement. In the second approach, the pragmatic view, presuppositions are not properties of sentences but rather properties of speakers or of linguistic performances given a certain context of utterance. From this view, a presupposed proposition is a condition for the felicitous utterance of the presupposing statement in a given context. Traditionally, it is assumed that semantic presuppositions differ from classical entailments, as presuppositions, unlike classical entailments, project under negation: if we compare a context of entailment to a context of presupposition, we should see that entailments, but not presuppositions, disappear under negation. This presentation aims to propose a revision of the semantic notion of presupposition. I argue that most standard cases of presuppositions are classical entailments. Moreover, I claim that all presuppositions that are classical entailments are also pragmatic presuppositions, while not all pragmatic presuppositions are also classical entailments. I contend that factive verbs offer a paradigmatic example of this distinction, as the factivity related to know is semantic, hence a classical entailment, whereas the factivity related to regret is merely pragmatic. This claim stands in contrast to Karttunen’s (1971) well-known analysis of factive verbs and his distinction between true factives (that is, emotive factives) and semifactives (that is, cognitive factives).}},
  author       = {{Colonna Dahlman, Roberta}},
  booktitle    = {{Philosophical Insights into Pragmatics}},
  editor       = {{Stalmaszczyk, Piotr}},
  isbn         = {{978-3-11-062376-5}},
  issn         = {{2627-227X}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  pages        = {{11--42}},
  publisher    = {{De Gruyter}},
  series       = {{Philosophical Analysis}},
  title        = {{Presuppositions, again}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110628937-002}},
  doi          = {{10.1515/9783110628937-002}},
  volume       = {{79}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}