Transparent Readings and Privileged Worlds


D.B. Tiskin


I present a problem for Sauerland’s [24] account of the restrictions on certain nonstandard de re readings in propositional attitude reports. Sauerland’s idea is to postulate the ontological prominence of the actual world so that no merely possible individual could have an actual counterpart. However, the problem Sauerland aims to solve extends to multiply nested attitude reports, where his prominence considerations are insufficient to explain either attested or non-attested readings. A solution I propose involves switching to tree-like possible world frames, thus creating an infinity of ontological levels. A remedy for Sauerland’s problem, the approach is shown to have shortcomings as regards the definability of factivity. DOI: 10.21146/2074-1472-2016-22-2-73-90






Abusch, D. “The Scope of Indefinites”, Natural Language Semantics. 1993, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 83–135.
Aloni, M. Quantification under Conceptual Covers. PhD thesis, ILLC, University of Amsterdam, 2001. 204 pp.
Bauerle, R. “Pragmatisch-semantische Aspekte der NP-interpretation”, Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Sprachtypologie und Textlinguistik, 1983, pp. 121–131.
Bonomi, A. Transparency and specificity in intensional contexts, in: On Quine, New Essays, 1995, pp. 164–185.
Buring, D. “Crossover Situations”, Natural Language Semantics, 2004, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 23–62.
Buring, D. Binding Theory. Cambridge University Press, 2005. 294 pp.
Fodor, J.D. The Linguistic Description of Opaque Contexts. Garland, 1979. 388 pp.
Gerbrandy, J.D., Groeneveld, W. “Reasoning about Information Change”, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 1997, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 147–169.
Gerbrandy, J.D. Bisimulations on Planet Kripke. ILLC Dissertation Series, 1999. 184 pp.
Heim, I., Kratzer, A. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell, 1998. 334 pp.
Hughes, G.E., Cresswell, M.J. A New Introduction to Modal Logic. Routledge, 1996. 432 pp.
Kaplan, D. “Quantifying in”, Synthese, 1968, Vol. 19, pp. 178–214.
Keshet, E. “Only the strong: Restricting Situation Variables”, Proceedings of SALT, Vol. 18, 2008, pp. 483–495.
Keshet, E. “Split Intensionality: A New Scope Theory of de re and de dicto”, Linguistics and Philosophy, 2010, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 251–283.
Lewis, D. “Counterpart Theory and Quantified Modal Logic”, The Journal of Philosophy, 1968, Vol. 65, No. 5, pp. 113–126.
Lewis, D. “Attitudes de dicto and de se”, Philosophical Review, 1979, Vol. 88, No. 4, pp. 513–543.
Lewis, D. On the plurality of worlds, Blackwell, 1986. 288 pp.
Lomuscio, A. Knowledge Sharing Among Ideal Agents. PhD thesis, University of Birmingham, 1999. 170 pp.
Musan, R.I. On the Temporal Interpretation of Noun Phrases, Garland, 1997. 208 pp.
Percus, O. “Constraints on Some Other Variables in Syntax”, Natural Language Semantics, 2000, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 173–229.
Quine, W.V.O. “Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes”, Journal of Philosophy, 1956, Vol. 53, No. 5, pp. 177–187.
Romoli, J., Sudo, Y. “De re / de dicto ambiguity and presupposition projection”. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, Vol. 13, 2009, pp. 425–438.
Russell, B. “On Denoting”, Mind, 1905, Vol. 14, No. 56, pp. 479–493.
Sauerland, U. “Counterparts Block Some ‘de re’ Readings”, in: L. Crnic and U. Sauerland (eds.), The Art and Craft of Semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim, MITWPL, 2014, Vol. 2, pp. 65–85.
Schueler, D. “World Variable Binding and Beta-binding”, Journal of Semantics, 2011, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 241–266.
Schwager, M. “Speaking of Qualities”, Proceedings of SALT, Vol. 19, 2009, pp. 395–412.
Schwarz, F. “Situation Pronouns in Determiner Phrases”, Natural Language Semantics, 2012, Vol. 20, No. 4, pp. 431–475.
Sharvit, Y. “Individual Concepts and Attitude Reports”, Proceedings of SALT, Vol. 8, 1998, pp. 233–248.
Shimada, J. Head Movement, Binding Theory, and Phrase Structure. MIT, 2007. [, accessed on 26.01.2016].
Sudo, Y. “On de re Predicates”, Proceedings of WCCFL 31, 2014, pp. 447–456.