Editor’s Notes:Ken Turner(k.p.turner@bton.ac.uk)is currently senior lecturer in linguistics with special reference to the philosophy of language in the School of Language, Literature and Communication at the Universi...Editor’s Notes:Ken Turner(k.p.turner@bton.ac.uk)is currently senior lecturer in linguistics with special reference to the philosophy of language in the School of Language, Literature and Communication at the University of Brighton. He has previously held appointments in the Department of Linguistics and Modern English Language at the University of Lancaster and in the School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences at the University of Sussex. His principal research interests are in semantics and pragmatics and in pursuit of these interests he (a) has co-organised the International Conferences on Contrastive Semantics and Pragmatics (University of Brighton 1995, University of Cambridge 2000 and Shanghai International Studies University 2005); (b) has co-organised the first Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics Workshop, Michigan State University) and (c) acts as series co-editor for Current Research in the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface (CRiSPI), published with Elsevier Science. The first volume of this series was his The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View. He has published widely on semantic and pragmatic themes, including editing or co-editing special issues of Language Sciences (1996), Journal of Pragmatics (2002), International Journal of Pragmatics (2003) and Acta Linguistica Hafniensia (2006). He is section editor for semantics and pragmatics in Blackwell’s new Language and Linguistics Compass and is currently preparing a book on conditionals. The following discussion has resulted from conversations between Ken Turner and Dingfang Shu, editor-in-chief of this journal, at the University of Brighton, where Shu stayed for a three-month visit during the summer of 2007.展开更多
A recent defence of the material analysis of natural indicative conditionals is examined. This defence, it is argued, is initially plausible but ultimately flawed. The empirical and logical case against the material a...A recent defence of the material analysis of natural indicative conditionals is examined. This defence, it is argued, is initially plausible but ultimately flawed. The empirical and logical case against the material analysis of natural indicative conditionals is made. The empirical and logical arguments are overwhelming and the conclusion is inevitable: natural language indicatives are not material conditionals.展开更多
文摘Editor’s Notes:Ken Turner(k.p.turner@bton.ac.uk)is currently senior lecturer in linguistics with special reference to the philosophy of language in the School of Language, Literature and Communication at the University of Brighton. He has previously held appointments in the Department of Linguistics and Modern English Language at the University of Lancaster and in the School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences at the University of Sussex. His principal research interests are in semantics and pragmatics and in pursuit of these interests he (a) has co-organised the International Conferences on Contrastive Semantics and Pragmatics (University of Brighton 1995, University of Cambridge 2000 and Shanghai International Studies University 2005); (b) has co-organised the first Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics Workshop, Michigan State University) and (c) acts as series co-editor for Current Research in the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface (CRiSPI), published with Elsevier Science. The first volume of this series was his The Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View. He has published widely on semantic and pragmatic themes, including editing or co-editing special issues of Language Sciences (1996), Journal of Pragmatics (2002), International Journal of Pragmatics (2003) and Acta Linguistica Hafniensia (2006). He is section editor for semantics and pragmatics in Blackwell’s new Language and Linguistics Compass and is currently preparing a book on conditionals. The following discussion has resulted from conversations between Ken Turner and Dingfang Shu, editor-in-chief of this journal, at the University of Brighton, where Shu stayed for a three-month visit during the summer of 2007.
文摘A recent defence of the material analysis of natural indicative conditionals is examined. This defence, it is argued, is initially plausible but ultimately flawed. The empirical and logical case against the material analysis of natural indicative conditionals is made. The empirical and logical arguments are overwhelming and the conclusion is inevitable: natural language indicatives are not material conditionals.
