Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T03:30:20.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Critical Notice of Henry Laycock Words Without Objects

Review products

LaycockHenry, Words without Objects: Semantics, Ontology, and Logic for Non-Singularity.Oxford: Oxford University Press2006. xiv + 202 pages.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Thomas J. McKay
Thomas J. McKay*
Affiliation:
Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY13244, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , June 2008 , pp. 301 - 323
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boolos, G. 1984. ‘To be is to be the value of a variable (or to be some values of some variables).’ Journal of Philosophy 81: 430-49. Reprinted in Boolos 1998, 54–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boolos, G. 1985. ‘Nominalist platonism.’ Philosophical Review 94: 327-44. Reprinted in Boolos 1998, 73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boolos, G. 1998. Logic, Logic and Logic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, H.M. 1970. ‘Quantities,’ The Philosophical Review 79: 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koslicki, K. 2007. Review of Words without Objects. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85: 160-3.Google Scholar
Lewis, D.K. 1991. Parts of Classes. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Linnebo, Ø. 2004. ‘Plural Quantification.’ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu/.Google Scholar
McKay, T.J. 2006. Plural Predication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montague, R. 1974. Formal Philosophy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Oliver, A. and Smiley, T.. 2001. ‘Strategies for a logic of plurals.’ The Philosophical Quarterly 51: 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quine, W.V.O. 1960. Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rayo, A. 2002. ‘Word and Objects,’ Noûs 36: 436-64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, B. 1905. ‘On Denoting.’ Mind 14: 479–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sennet, A. 2007. Review of Words without Objects. Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, http://ndpr.nd.edu/review.cfm?id=9103.Google Scholar
Sharvy, R. 1980. ‘A more general theory of definite descriptions.’ Philosophical Review 89: 607–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, B.-U. 1999a. ‘Is Mereology Ontologically Innocent?’ Philosophical Studies 93: 141-60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, B.-U. 1999b. ‘Is two a property?’ Journal of Philosophy 95: 163-90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, B.-U. 2005. ‘The Logic and Meaning of Plurals,’ Part I. Journal of Philosophical Logic 34: 459–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, B.-U. 2006. ‘The Logic and Meaning of Plurals,’ Part II. Journal of Philosophical Logic 35: 239-88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar