Still going strong
Name
11050_2020_9171_ReferencePDF.pdf
Size
200.95 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum (MD5)
5d1d2e9be38aa4f666bdb9a01c2c0ba0
Author(s)
von Fintel, Kai
Gillies, Anthony S.
Date Issued
January 2021
Journal
Natural Language Semantics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Citation
von Fintel, Kai and Anthony S. Gillies. "Still going strong." Natural Language Semantics 29, 1 (January 2021): 91–113 © 2021 Springer Nature B.V.
Version
Author's final manuscript
Abstract
In “Must ...stay ...strong!” (von Fintel and Gillies in Nat Lang Semant 18:351–383, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-010-9058-2), we set out to slay a dragon, or rather what we called The Mantra: that epistemic must has a modal force weaker than expected from standard modal logic, that it doesn’t entail its prejacent, and that the best explanation for the evidential feel of must is a pragmatic explanation. We argued that all three sub-mantras are wrong and offered an explanation according to which must is strong, entailing, and the felt indirectness is the product of an evidential presupposition carried by epistemic modals. Mantras being what they are, it is no surprise that each of the sub-mantras have been given new defenses. Here we offer them new problems and update our picture, concluding that must is (still) strong.
MIT Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophy
Terms of Use
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike
Persistent DSpace Link
DOI of Published Version
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-020-09171-x
