E-Collection
LOGIN
PRODUCTS
All Products
Online Resources
Journals & Series
Digital Media
Books & Reference Works
E-Collection
About
Alphabetically
By Category
By Type
Price Lists
Terms and Conditions
MEMBERSHIPS
Societies & Associations
Conference Registrations
SERVICES
Conference Exhibits
Conference Registrations
Electronic Publishing
Journal Advertising
Mailing Lists
Marketing Services
Membership Services
Production Typesetting
Subscription Fulfillment
ABOUT
About us
Contact
FAQs
Order Info
Privacy
Support
Search narrowed by:
Applied Philosophy
[x]
Social Science
[x]
English
[x]
ProtoSociology
[x]
Book Review
[x]
Narrow search
By category:
Applied Philosophy
3
Contemporary Philosophy
3
Social Science
3
By publication type:
Journal
3
By language:
English
3
By journals:
ProtoSociology
3
By document type:
Book Review
3
Search for:
*:*
Additional hits:
38225
in PDC Directory
ADVANCED SEARCH
All
Text
Title
Author
Abstract
or
and
All
Text
Title
Author
Abstract
or
and
All
Text
Title
Author
Abstract
All of the words
Any of the words
Date Range (years) from
to
Clear
Results per page:
20
50
100
Sort by:
Relevance
Date - recent first
Date - oldest first
Title
Publication
Author
Displaying: 1-3 of 3 documents
0.013 sec
1.
ProtoSociology:
Volume
>
25
Nikola Kompa
Review: Stephen Schiffer, The Things We Mean
view
|
rights & permissions
2.
ProtoSociology:
Volume
>
31
William B. Starr
Mood, Force and Truth
abstract
|
view
|
rights & permissions
There is a big difference between saying Maya is singing, Is Maya singing? and Sing Maya! This paper examines and criticizes two attempts to rigorously explain this difference: Searle’s speech act theory and the truth-conditional reductionism advocated by Davidson and Lewis. On the speech act analysis, each utterance contains a marker which says what kind of speech act the utterance counts as performing. The truth-conditional reductionists try to reanalyze the non-declaratives (Is Maya singing? and Sing Maya!) as complex declarative forms. The former analysis fails to recognize the indirect relationship between sentence (or clause) type and utterance force. The latter analysis fails to recognize the distinctive and thoroughly compositional contribution that the imperative, interrogative and declarative mood make to sentences containing them.
3.
ProtoSociology:
Volume
>
7
Frank Siebelt
Mental Causation
view
|
rights & permissions