Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Merel Semeijn - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Merel Semeijn Amsterdam colloquium 2019 December 19, 2019

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Common Ground Set of presuppositions mutually shared by conversational participants Bob is coming back next week [Stalnaker(2002), Stalnaker(1984)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso p is common ground between speaker a and addressee b iff B a p B b p Acc a p Acc b p B b B a p B a B b p B b Acc a p B a Acc b p B a B b B a p B b B a B b p B a B b Acc a p B b B a Acc b p . . . . . . . . . . . . C a , b p C b , a p C b , a C a , b p C a , b C b , a p C a , b C b , a C a , b p C b , a C a , b C b , a p . . . . . . [Stalnaker(2002), Stokke(2013), Geurts(1997)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Generalized common ground p is common ground between all conversational participants in some community iff ∀ x ( Cx → B x p ) ∀ x ∀ y ( Cx ∧ Cy → B x B y p )) ∀ x ∀ y ∀ z ( Cx ∧ Cy ∧ Cz → B x B y B z p )) . . . [Lewis(1969), Schiffer(1972)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso p is common ground between Monk and Semeijn iff B m p B s p B s B m p B m B s p B m B s B m p B s B m B s p . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso p is common ground between Monk and Semeijn iff B m p B s p B s B m p B m B s p B m B s B m p B s B m B s p . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso Table of Contents 1 The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Four types of conversations 2 Redefining common ground Abelard’s distinction In sensu composito common ground In sensu diviso common ground 3 Deriving de re beliefs 4 The shy aquaintance

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem Table of Contents 1 The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Four types of conversations 2 Redefining common ground Abelard’s distinction In sensu composito common ground In sensu diviso common ground 3 Deriving de re beliefs 4 The shy aquaintance

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Relation analysis of de re belief a believes de re of b that he is Q There is an acquaintance relation from a to b , and a believes that the person she knows through this acquaintance relation is Q ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( v [ R 1 ( i , v )])]] ι R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( 1 )]] ι [Kaplan(1968), Lewis(1979)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Relation analysis of de re belief a believes de re of b that he is Q There is an acquaintance relation from a to b , and a self-ascribes the property of being such that the person she knows through this acquaintance relation is Q ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( v [ R 1 ( i , v )])]] ι R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( 1 )]] ι [Kaplan(1968), Lewis(1979)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Relation analysis of de re belief a believes de re of b that he is Q There is an acquaintance relation from a to b , and a self-ascribes the property of being such that the person she knows through this acquaintance relation is Q ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( v [ R 1 ( i , v )])]] ι R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ Q ( 1 )]] ι [Kaplan(1968), Lewis(1979)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Iterative de re belief a believes de re of b that b believes de re of c that she is Q ( B a B b Qc ) a is acquainted with both b and c and a self-ascribes the property of being such that b is acquainted with c and that b self-ascribes the property of being such that “the person that I am acquainted with is Q ” R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( a , c ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 3 [ R 3 ( 1 , 2 )] ∧ ι ι R i ′ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ Q ( 3 )]]]] ι ι R i [Maier(2009)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations Iterative de re belief a believes de re of b that b believes de re of c that she is Q ( B a B b Qc ) a is acquainted with both b and c and a self-ascribes the property of being such that b is acquainted with c and that b self-ascribes the property of being such that “the person that I am acquainted with is Q ” R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( a , c ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 3 [ R 3 ( 1 , 2 )] ∧ ι ι R i ′ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ Q ( 3 )]]]] ι ι R i [Maier(2009)]

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations De re common ground p is common ground between speaker a and addressee b iff B ∗ a λ i [ p ] B ∗ b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] R i R i ι R i ′ ι R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations De re common ground p is common ground between speaker a and addressee b iff B ∗ a λ i [ p ] B ∗ b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] R i R i ι R i ′ ι R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations De re common ground p is common ground between speaker a and addressee b iff B ∗ a λ i [ p ] B ∗ b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] R i R i ι R i ′ ι R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem De re common ground and acquaintance relations De re common ground p is common ground between speaker a and addressee b iff B ∗ a λ i [ p ] B ∗ b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] R i R i ι R i ′ ι R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem Four types of conversations ‘Face-to-face’ communication ✓ Lunch conversation/ email from friend B ∗ a λ i [ p ] B ∗ b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ι R i R i ′ ι R i R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem Four types of conversations Unknown addressee ✗ Book/ broadcasted speech/ blogpost B ∗ B ∗ a λ i [ p ] b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ι R i R i ′ ι R i R i ′ ι . . . . . .

Common ground: In sensu composito or in sensu diviso The problem Four types of conversations Unknown speaker ✗ Anonymous message B ∗ B ∗ a λ i [ p ] b λ i [ p ] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ p ]]] ι R i ι R i R i R i ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( a , b ) ∧ B ∗ a λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ∃ R 1 [ R 1 ( b , a ) ∧ B ∗ b λ i [ ∃ R 2 [ R 2 ( 1 , i ) ι ι ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ∧ B ∗ 1 λ i ′ [ B ∗ 2 λ i ′′ [ p ]]]]] ι R i R i ′ ι R i R i ′ ι . . . . . .