ЛОГИКО-СЕМАНТИЧЕСКИЙ АНАЛИЗ СУБЪЕКТИВНЫХ ПРЕДИКАТОВ

This article discusses the prominent issues of subjective language, which includes PPTs. They take into account opinions rather than facts. Modern logicians and linguists who consider PPTs notice the puzzle about faultless disagreement and the problem of the acquaintance inference. Over the past 10 years, two main doctrines have formed which offer different solutions to these issues: contextualism and relativism. The competition between them is considered in this article. Additionally, we point out that there is a special attention to the speaker in subjective language because the meaning of the sentence is determined from the position of the speaker. However, we assume that subjective predicates can also involve non-local judges, who are not always the speaker. In this regard, we need to turn to a logical apparatus, namely the de re reading, which allows taking into account non-local judges in subjective statements. В данной статье исследуются субъективные предикаты, которые рассматривают скорее мнение, чем факты. Современные логики и лингвисты обращают особое внимание на проблему безошибочного разногласия и роль непосредственного опыта. За последние 10 лет сформировалось два основных лагеря, которые предлагают различные решения данных вопросов. Дискуссия между данными направлениями будет затронута в данной работе. Отмечается, что особое внимание уделяется говорящему, с позиции которого определяется значение предложения, но субъективные предикаты могут говорить так же и о нелокальных судьях, которыми не всегда является говорящий. В связи с этим отмечается необходимость обращения к логическому аппарату, а именно чтению de re, которое позволяет учитывать нелокальных судей в субъективных высказываниях.

The Projection Problem for Predicates of Taste

Utterances of simple sentences containing taste predicates (e.g. "delicious", "fun", "frightening") typically imply that the speaker has had a particular sort of first-hand experience with the object of predication. For example, an utterance of "The carrot cake is delicious" would typically imply that the speaker had actually tasted the cake in question, and is not, for example, merely basing her judgment on the testimony of others. According to one approach, this 'acquaintance inference' is essentially an implicature, one generated by the Maxim of Quality together with a certain principle concerning the epistemology of taste (Ninan 2014). We first discuss some problems for this approach, problems that arise in connection with disjunction and generalized quantifiers. Then, after stating a conjecture concerning which operators 'obviate' the acquaintance inference and which do not, we build on Anand and Korotkova 2018 and Willer and Kennedy Forthcoming by developing a theory that treats the acquaintance requirement as a presupposition, albeit one that can be obviated by certain operators.

Taste predicates and the acquaintance inference

Simple sentences containing predicates like "tasty<br /> and "beautiful" typically suggest that the speaker has first-hand knowledge of the item being evaluated. I consider two explanations of this "acquaintance inference": a presuppositional approach, and a pragmatic-epistemic approach. The presuppositional approach has a number of virtues, but runs into trouble because the acquaintance inference has a very different projection pattern from that of standard presuppositions. The pragmatic-epistemic approach accounts for the main data discussed in the paper, but faces challenges of its own.