2013
DOI: 10.3765/salt.v23i0.2679
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The dynamics of subjectivity

Abstract: I adapt the dynamic framework for vagueness of Barker 2002 to the analysis of subjective taste predicates. I argue, following Kennedy 2013, that there are two qualitatively distinct types of subjectivity in natural language, which I call mapping subjectivity and (vague) standards subjectivity, and that the matrix predicate find is sensitive to the distinction between them. Novel to the present analysis is the proposal that find requires not just a complement that supports mapping subjectivity, but also a conte… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…(See also Fleisher (2013) and Hirvonen (2014) for discussion of this example.) Saebø (2009) accounts for this in terms of a type clash.…”
Section: Subjective Attitude Verbs In Outlook-based Semanticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(See also Fleisher (2013) and Hirvonen (2014) for discussion of this example.) Saebø (2009) accounts for this in terms of a type clash.…”
Section: Subjective Attitude Verbs In Outlook-based Semanticsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the live tastes to endorse for purposes of conversation represented by T 5 and T 8 . The loci of context‐sensitivity may differ, but the formal diagnosis of their felicity under ‘find’ is the same (contrast Fleisher 2013): the uses of the complement distinguish among live representations of context.…”
Section: ‘Find’ and “Subjectivity”mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 See Stephenson 2007b, Saebø 2009, Bouchard 2012, Fleisher 2013, Kennedy 2013, Bylinina 2016, Kennedy & Willer 2016, McNally & Stojanovic 2017, Coppock 2018. The relevant use of 'find' is stative with small clause complements.…”
Section: Bmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Isso pode ser claramente explicitado se colocarmos esses itens em estruturas de comparação (FLEISHER, 2013), como nos exemplos abaixo:…”
Section: Introductionunclassified