Main content



Loading wiki pages...

Wiki Version:
Semanticists and philosophers of fiction that formulate analyses of contensive statements of the form ‘In/According to *s*, ϕ’, usually treat the ‘In *s*’-operator (**In**) and the ‘According to *s*’-operator (**Acc**) on a par. I argue that there are in fact three clusters of linguistic observations that suggest that the **In** and **Acc** operators require separate semantic analyses. These observations concern (I) preferences for **In** or **Acc** in contensive statements about fictional or non-fictional media, (II) preferences for **In** or **Acc** in contensive statements about implicit or explicit content and (III) tense use preferences in contensive statements with **In** and **Acc**. To account for these three clusters of observations I propose to, firstly, adopt the Lewisian (1978) possible world analysis for contensive statements with **In**. Roughly: ‘**In** *s*, ϕ’ is true iff in the worlds compatible with *s*, ϕ. Secondly, I propose to analyze contensive statements with **Acc** as indirect speech reports. Roughly: ‘**Acc** *s*, ϕ’ is true iff *s* asserts that ϕ.
OSF does not support the use of Internet Explorer. For optimal performance, please switch to another browser.
This website relies on cookies to help provide a better user experience. By clicking Accept or continuing to use the site, you agree. For more information, see our Privacy Policy and information on cookie use.

Start managing your projects on the OSF today.

Free and easy to use, the Open Science Framework supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution, reporting, archiving, and discovery.