Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T06:32:56.460Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Intuitions and Ambiguity Tests*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Lawrence D. Roberts
Lawrence D. Roberts*
Affiliation:
S.U.N.Y. at Binghamton, Binghamton, NY13901, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Arnold Zwicky and Jerrold Sadock (1987) object to my test for distinguishing ambiguity from generality (unspecifiedness) by offering a counterexample and general criticisms about the use of intuitions in the test. Though I disagree with their criticisms, their paper has helped me to become aware of the unclarity of my earlier paper in regard to generality.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 1987 , pp. 189 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1987

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.)

Footnotes

*

I wish to thank Jerrold Sadock for sending me a copy of‘ A Non-test for Ambiguity’ before its publication, and Jay David Atlas for help in understanding generality or unspecifiedness and in seeing unclarities about this notion in my earlier paper.

References

Atlas, Jay David ‘Negation, Ambiguity, and Presupposition,’ Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (1977) 321–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atlas, Jay David ‘Grammatical Non-Specification: The Mistaken Disjunction “Theory”,’ Linguistics and Philosophy 7 (1984) 433’43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. Phonology: Theory and Analysis (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston 1975)Google Scholar
Green, G.M. ‘Some Observations on the Syntax and Semantics of Instrumental Verbs,’ in Peranteau, P. M. Levi, J. N. and Phares, G.C. eds Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (Chicago: University of Chicago Dept. of Linguistics 1972) 83–97Google Scholar
Lawler, J. ‘Generic to a Fault,’ in Paranteau, P. M. Levi, J.N. and Phares, G.C. eds Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (Chicago: University of Chicago in Dept. of Linguistics 1972) 247–58Google Scholar
Roberts, Lawrence D. ‘Ambiguity vs Generality: Removal of a Logical Confusion,’ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14 (1984) 295–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Lawrence D. How Reference Works: Explanatory Models for Indexicals, Descriptions and Opacity (manuscript)Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M. and Zwicky, Arnold M. ‘Ambiguity Tests and How to Fail Them,’ Syntax and Semantics 4 (1975) 1–36Google Scholar
Sadock, Jerrold M. and Zwicky, Arnold M. ‘A Non-test for Ambiguity,’ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 17 (1987) 185–7Google Scholar