Free choice in deontic inquisitive semantics. Aher, M. In Aloni, M., Kimmelman, V., Roelofsen, F., Weidmann-Sassoon, G., Schulz, K., & Westera, M., editors, Logic, Language, and Meaning. Selected papers from the 18th Amsterdam Colloquium, pages 22–31, Berlin Heidelberg, 2012. Springer.
Free choice in deontic inquisitive semantics [link]Paper  doi  abstract   bibtex   
We will propose a novel solution to the free choice puzzle. The approach is driven by empirical data from legal discourse and does not suffer from the same problems as implicature-based accounts. Following Anderson's violation-based deontic logic, we will demonstrate that a support-based radical inquisitive semantics will correctly model both the free choice effect and the standard disjunctive behaviour when disjunctive permission is embedded under negation. An inquisitive semantics also models the case when disjunctive permission is continued with ``but I do not know which'' which coerces an ignorance reading. We also demonstrate that a principled approach to negation provides a monotonic but restricted definition of entailment, which solves the problem of strengthening with a conjunct that is used as a counterargument against violation-based accounts.
@inproceedings{Aher:12,
	abstract = {We will propose a novel solution to the free choice puzzle. The approach is driven by empirical data from legal discourse and does not suffer from the same problems as implicature-based accounts. Following Anderson's violation-based deontic logic, we will demonstrate that a support-based radical inquisitive semantics will correctly model both the free choice effect and the standard disjunctive behaviour when disjunctive permission is embedded under negation. An inquisitive semantics also models the case when disjunctive permission is continued with ``but I do not know which'' which coerces an ignorance reading. We also demonstrate that a principled approach to negation provides a monotonic but restricted definition of entailment, which solves the problem of strengthening with a conjunct that is used as a counterargument against violation-based accounts.},
	address = {Berlin Heidelberg},
	author = {Martin Aher},
	booktitle = {Logic, Language, and Meaning. Selected papers from the 18th Amsterdam Colloquium},
	date-added = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},
	date-modified = {2021-08-17 00:00:00 +0000},
	doi = {10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_3},
	editor = {Maria Aloni and Vadim Kimmelman and Floris Roelofsen and Galit Weidmann-Sassoon and Katrin Schulz and Matthijs Westera},
	pages = {22--31},
	publisher = {Springer},
	title = {Free choice in deontic inquisitive semantics},
	url = {https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-642-31482-7_3},
	year = {2012},
	Bdsk-Url-1 = {https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-642-31482-7_3},
	Bdsk-Url-2 = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31482-7_3}}

Downloads: 0