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?

  • Is this really a linguistics question? Seems more of a philosophy question to me.
    – curiousdannii
    Commented Dec 11, 2020 at 15:10
  • 5
    @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. Commented Dec 11, 2020 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
    Commented Dec 11, 2020 at 23:26
  • 1
    I think your questions about Krazter should be merged
    – Alex B.
    Commented Dec 12, 2020 at 19:36
  • It's dominant in certain formal linguistic areas. It's not a syntactic theory of modality.
    – jlawler
    Commented Dec 14, 2020 at 0:43


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.