That solution to Prior’s puzzle

Prior’s puzzle is a puzzle about the substitution of certain putatively synonymous or coreferential expressions in sentences. Prior’s puzzle is important, because a satisfactory solution to it should constitute a crucial part of an adequate semantic theory for both proposition-embedding expressions...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Philosophical studies 2022-09, Vol.179 (9), p.2765-2785
Main Author: Güngör, Hüseyin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Education
Epistemology
Ethics
Metaphysics
Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c286t-b4667d5760e9a2957198337ffca35bd5a9722062d977390e12b07a037215522e3
container_end_page 2785
container_issue 9
container_start_page 2765
container_title Philosophical studies
container_volume 179
creator Güngör, Hüseyin
description Prior’s puzzle is a puzzle about the substitution of certain putatively synonymous or coreferential expressions in sentences. Prior’s puzzle is important, because a satisfactory solution to it should constitute a crucial part of an adequate semantic theory for both proposition-embedding expressions and attitudinal verbs. I argue that two recent solutions to this puzzle are unsatisfactory. They either focus on the meaning of attitudinal verbs or content nouns. I propose a solution relying on a recent analysis of that -clauses in linguistics. Our solution is superior, as it not only avoids the problems faced by previous solutions, but it also brings developments in linguistics in line to solve an old puzzle in philosophy.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11098-022-01794-6
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref_sprin</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_s11098_022_01794_6</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1007_s11098_022_01794_6</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c286t-b4667d5760e9a2957198337ffca35bd5a9722062d977390e12b07a037215522e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9jz1OxDAUhC0EEsvCBajCAQzv2bFfXKIVf9JKUCy15SQOZBXilZ0UbMU1uB4nIRBqqmnmG83H2DnCJQLQVUIEU3AQggOSybk-YAtUJDkUhTxkCwCJvEDUx-wkpS0AaKPyBbvYvLohS6Ebhzb02RCyp9iG-PXxmbLduN93_pQdNa5L_uwvl-z59mazuufrx7uH1fWaV6LQAy9zralWpMEbJ4wiNIWU1DSVk6qslTMkBGhRGyJpwKMogRxIEqiUEF4umZh3qxhSir6xu9i-ufhuEeyPpJ0l7SRpfyWtniA5Q2kq9y8-2m0YYz_9_I_6BlWtUzs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>That solution to Prior’s puzzle</title><source>EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Güngör, Hüseyin</creator><creatorcontrib>Güngör, Hüseyin</creatorcontrib><description>Prior’s puzzle is a puzzle about the substitution of certain putatively synonymous or coreferential expressions in sentences. Prior’s puzzle is important, because a satisfactory solution to it should constitute a crucial part of an adequate semantic theory for both proposition-embedding expressions and attitudinal verbs. I argue that two recent solutions to this puzzle are unsatisfactory. They either focus on the meaning of attitudinal verbs or content nouns. I propose a solution relying on a recent analysis of that -clauses in linguistics. Our solution is superior, as it not only avoids the problems faced by previous solutions, but it also brings developments in linguistics in line to solve an old puzzle in philosophy.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0031-8116</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0883</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11098-022-01794-6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Education ; Epistemology ; Ethics ; Metaphysics ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Language ; Philosophy of Mind</subject><ispartof>Philosophical studies, 2022-09, Vol.179 (9), p.2765-2785</ispartof><rights>The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c286t-b4667d5760e9a2957198337ffca35bd5a9722062d977390e12b07a037215522e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-6403-0570</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Güngör, Hüseyin</creatorcontrib><title>That solution to Prior’s puzzle</title><title>Philosophical studies</title><addtitle>Philos Stud</addtitle><description>Prior’s puzzle is a puzzle about the substitution of certain putatively synonymous or coreferential expressions in sentences. Prior’s puzzle is important, because a satisfactory solution to it should constitute a crucial part of an adequate semantic theory for both proposition-embedding expressions and attitudinal verbs. I argue that two recent solutions to this puzzle are unsatisfactory. They either focus on the meaning of attitudinal verbs or content nouns. I propose a solution relying on a recent analysis of that -clauses in linguistics. Our solution is superior, as it not only avoids the problems faced by previous solutions, but it also brings developments in linguistics in line to solve an old puzzle in philosophy.</description><subject>Education</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Language</subject><subject>Philosophy of Mind</subject><issn>0031-8116</issn><issn>1573-0883</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9jz1OxDAUhC0EEsvCBajCAQzv2bFfXKIVf9JKUCy15SQOZBXilZ0UbMU1uB4nIRBqqmnmG83H2DnCJQLQVUIEU3AQggOSybk-YAtUJDkUhTxkCwCJvEDUx-wkpS0AaKPyBbvYvLohS6Ebhzb02RCyp9iG-PXxmbLduN93_pQdNa5L_uwvl-z59mazuufrx7uH1fWaV6LQAy9zralWpMEbJ4wiNIWU1DSVk6qslTMkBGhRGyJpwKMogRxIEqiUEF4umZh3qxhSir6xu9i-ufhuEeyPpJ0l7SRpfyWtniA5Q2kq9y8-2m0YYz_9_I_6BlWtUzs</recordid><startdate>20220901</startdate><enddate>20220901</enddate><creator>Güngör, Hüseyin</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6403-0570</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220901</creationdate><title>That solution to Prior’s puzzle</title><author>Güngör, Hüseyin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c286t-b4667d5760e9a2957198337ffca35bd5a9722062d977390e12b07a037215522e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Education</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Language</topic><topic>Philosophy of Mind</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Güngör, Hüseyin</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Philosophical studies</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Güngör, Hüseyin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>That solution to Prior’s puzzle</atitle><jtitle>Philosophical studies</jtitle><stitle>Philos Stud</stitle><date>2022-09-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>179</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>2765</spage><epage>2785</epage><pages>2765-2785</pages><issn>0031-8116</issn><eissn>1573-0883</eissn><abstract>Prior’s puzzle is a puzzle about the substitution of certain putatively synonymous or coreferential expressions in sentences. Prior’s puzzle is important, because a satisfactory solution to it should constitute a crucial part of an adequate semantic theory for both proposition-embedding expressions and attitudinal verbs. I argue that two recent solutions to this puzzle are unsatisfactory. They either focus on the meaning of attitudinal verbs or content nouns. I propose a solution relying on a recent analysis of that -clauses in linguistics. Our solution is superior, as it not only avoids the problems faced by previous solutions, but it also brings developments in linguistics in line to solve an old puzzle in philosophy.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s11098-022-01794-6</doi><tpages>21</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6403-0570</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0031-8116
ispartof Philosophical studies, 2022-09, Vol.179 (9), p.2765-2785
issn 0031-8116
1573-0883
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1007_s11098_022_01794_6
source EBSCOhost MLA International Bibliography With Full Text; Springer Nature
subjects Education
Epistemology
Ethics
Metaphysics
Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Mind
title That solution to Prior’s puzzle
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T14%3A19%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref_sprin&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=That%20solution%20to%20Prior%E2%80%99s%20puzzle&rft.jtitle=Philosophical%20studies&rft.au=G%C3%BCng%C3%B6r,%20H%C3%BCseyin&rft.date=2022-09-01&rft.volume=179&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=2765&rft.epage=2785&rft.pages=2765-2785&rft.issn=0031-8116&rft.eissn=1573-0883&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11098-022-01794-6&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref_sprin%3E10_1007_s11098_022_01794_6%3C/crossref_sprin%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c286t-b4667d5760e9a2957198337ffca35bd5a9722062d977390e12b07a037215522e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true