2

In Kratzer’s theory, for each world w, modal base is the set of propositions p such that the speaker knows in w that p is true, e.g. f(w) = {p1, p2, p3}.

Following the standard assumption in possible worlds semantics, a proposition is taken as a set of possible worlds in Kratzer’s theory, e.g. p1 = {w1,w2,w3}, p2 = {w2,w3}, p3 = {w1,w2,w3,w4}.

I just wonder why p is composed of possible worlds? Shouldn't it be that we evaluate p's truth value in possible worlds?

5
  • Is this really a linguistics question? Seems more of a philosophy question to me. – curiousdannii Dec 11 '20 at 15:10
  • 4
    @curiousdannii Kratzer's theory of the semantics of modals is the dominant one in linguistics. Clearly questions about it therefore are fitting for a linguistics site such as this one. Just about any formal semantics will have an overlap with philosophy. – Araucaria - him Dec 11 '20 at 18:52
  • @Araucaria-Nothereanymore. It may be dominant within formal semantics, but that is only a tiny part of linguistics. I spent quite some time studying modality and don't remember coming across it. – curiousdannii Dec 11 '20 at 23:26
  • 1
    I think your questions about Krazter should be merged – Alex B. Dec 12 '20 at 19:36
  • It's dominant in certain formal linguistic areas. It's not a syntactic theory of modality. – jlawler Dec 14 '20 at 0:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.