4 Nov 2011, 2pm-4pm, Manchester 227
Complex demonstratives (“That F”) are taken to be devices of reference, somewhat like names. But there is evidence to suggest that they are quantifiers. The evidence comes from both linguistics (ACD, WCO) and philosophy. In the talk, I will argue that the evidence holds good against a number of criticisms. A different logical form for complex demonstratives will be argued for from those suggested by King (2001) and Ludwig and Lepore (2002). If my arguments prove right, it seems that intentions play no part in the semantics of complex demonstratives. And complex demonstratives do not give any evidence for a privileged division of the objects of the world.