Skip Navigation



Journal of Semantics Advance Access published online on July 17, 2006
Journal of Semantics, doi:10.1093/jos/ffl004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/4/383    most recent
ffl004v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by van Rooij, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.
Received February 21, 2006
Revised May 8, 2006
Accepted June 18, 2006

Article

Free Choice Counterfactual Donkeys

Robert van Rooij 1 *

1 Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC), University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Doelenstraat 15, 1012 CP Amsterdam

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Robert van Rooij, E-mail: R.A.M.vanRooij{at}uva.nl


  Abstract

We propose a straightforward analysis of counterfactual donkey sentences, by combining the Lewis/Stalnaker analysis of counterfactuals with standard dynamic semantics. The main idea is to define a similarity relation between world-assignment pairs such that two such pairs are unconnected if their assignments differ. We show that with the help of this ordering relation we can also account for a number of related problems involving disjunctions and the use of any in counterfactuals and permission sentences.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J SemanticsHome page
Y. Wang
Counterfactual Donkey Sentences: A Response to Robert van Rooij
J Semantics, August 1, 2009; 26(3): 317 - 328.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.