TY - JOUR
T1 - The Wettstein / Salmon debate
T2 - Critique and resolution
AU - Reimer, Marga
PY - 1998
Y1 - 1998
N2 - Does Keith Donnellan's referential/attributive distinction have "semantic significance"? Howard Wettstein has claimed (in several papers) that it does; Nathan Salmon has responded (in several papers) that it does not. Specifically, while Wettstein has claimed that definite descriptions, used referentially, function semanticaliy as demonstratives, Salmon has responded to Wettstein's claims by defending a unitary Russellian account of such expressions, according to which they invariably function as quantifiers. This paper involves a critique of the debate between Wettstein and Salmon, and offers a tentative resolution of that debate: one that favors Wettstein's "ambiguity" account over the unitary Russellian account defended by Salmon.
AB - Does Keith Donnellan's referential/attributive distinction have "semantic significance"? Howard Wettstein has claimed (in several papers) that it does; Nathan Salmon has responded (in several papers) that it does not. Specifically, while Wettstein has claimed that definite descriptions, used referentially, function semanticaliy as demonstratives, Salmon has responded to Wettstein's claims by defending a unitary Russellian account of such expressions, according to which they invariably function as quantifiers. This paper involves a critique of the debate between Wettstein and Salmon, and offers a tentative resolution of that debate: one that favors Wettstein's "ambiguity" account over the unitary Russellian account defended by Salmon.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=52849123697&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=52849123697&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/1468-0114.00054
DO - 10.1111/1468-0114.00054
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:52849123697
SN - 0279-0750
VL - 79
SP - 130
EP - 151
JO - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
JF - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
IS - 2
ER -