Webbläsaren som du använder stöds inte av denna webbplats. Alla versioner av Internet Explorer stöds inte längre, av oss eller Microsoft (läs mer här: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Var god och använd en modern webbläsare för att ta del av denna webbplats, som t.ex. nyaste versioner av Edge, Chrome, Firefox eller Safari osv.

Did People in the Middle Ages Know that the Earth Was Flat?

Författare

Summary, in English

The goal of this paper is to explore the presuppositionality of factive verbs, with special emphasis on the verbs know and regret. The hypothesis put forward here is that the factivity related to know and the factivity related to regret are two different phenomena, as the former is a semantic implication (an entailment) that is licensed by the conventional meaning of know, while the latter is a purely pragmatic phenomenon that arises conversationally. More specifically, it is argued that know is factive in the sense that it both entails and (pragmatically) presupposes p, while regret is factive in the sense that it only (pragmatically) presupposes p. In a recent article, Hazlett (2010) shows with authentic examples how know is used non-factively in ordinary language, and he observes in these examples, as he says, “a threat to Factivity”. I argue that non-factive uses of factive verbs, such as know and regret, far from being a threat to factivity, show that, on the one hand, know is ambiguous between a factive and a non-factive sense; on the other hand, in the case of regret, the presupposition of factivity has to be intended as a merely pragmatic implication which can be suspended by the speaker herself.

Avdelning/ar

Publiceringsår

2016-06

Språk

Engelska

Sidor

139-152

Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie

Acta Analytica

Volym

31

Issue

2

Dokumenttyp

Artikel i tidskrift

Förlag

Springer

Ämne

  • General Language Studies and Linguistics
  • Philosophy

Nyckelord

  • Factivity
  • Know
  • Regret
  • Entailment
  • Pragmatic Presupposition
  • Presupposition cancellation
  • Ambiguity

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt

  • ISSN: 0353-5150