|Quote/Disquotation: quotes are reproductions of verbal or written utterances made or found at a different time and / or at a different place. They may be put forward verbally or in writing. Problems arise for the interpretation of the original utterance if it contains linguistic elements that refer to persons or situations in the utterance context. See also indirect speech, quasi-quotation, intensions, propositions, opacity, two-dimensional semantics._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Robert Brandom on Quote/Disquotation - Dictionary of Arguments
Principle of disquotation: "P " should occur simultaneously inside and outside quotation marks. If a speaker agrees with "p", then he believes that p.
BrandomVs: the combination of translation and disquotation (= type repetition) is not generally suitable as an analysis of the relation between the reported and the reporting token in indirect speech attributions. >Attribution, >Inderect speech.
Three types of exceptions -
1st example: Cicero, Roman orator, or "Cicero" spy in World War II.
The arrangement corresponds to the Paderewski case, but the double use of "Cicero" does not allow for any inconsistency or paradox. Paderewski is coreferent, the two "Cicero" is not.
For example, someone hears from the pianist Paderewski, and thinks he is musical. Later he hears about a politician who was also prime minister of the Polish government in exile and does not consider him musical. (In reality it is both times Ignaz Paderewski).
The parallel would not be that the inventor of the bifocal spectacles would not have invented the lightning rod, but that the inventor of the lightning rod would not have invented the lightning rod.
Quote/indirect speech/Brandom: quote redemption = repetition of types - three types of exceptions - 1) "Cicero": spy: not co-referential with Roman orator, but no inconsistency or paradox because of double occurrence - 2) Paderewski: co-referential.
3) Kripke's dilemma: only occurs under adequacy conditions: the speaker must be able to distinguish his case by "pure logic" or "semantic introspection".
Brandom: why should we not rightly conclude that proper names are sometimes used in such a way that the principle of citation extinction is not applicable, because of the dual use of not only the "Cicero" type but also the "Paderewski" type? You can't find an answer. >Proper names, >Causal theory of names, >Description levels._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Making it exlicit. Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment, Cambridge/MA 1994
Expressive Vernunft Frankfurt 2000
Articulating reasons. An Introduction to Inferentialism, Cambridge/MA 2001
Begründen und Begreifen Frankfurt 2001