[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Martin Bays <mbays@hidden.email> wrote: > * Tuesday, 2012-09-11 at 11:15 +0100 - And Rosta <and.rosta@hidden.email>: >> >> The current situation is the one the truth-conditions of the l- >> formula is evaluated against. I think distinguishing situations from >> UoD is a helpful move. > > Maybe. But in situational semantics (disclaimer: I don't actually know > anything about situational semantics), claims are still meant to be > evaluated against whole worlds. I don't know anything about it either, but the second sentence from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/situations-semantics/ says pretty much the opposite: "In situation semantics, linguistic expressions are evaluated with respect to partial, rather than complete, worlds." > In what sense is that equivalence to be read? If we > interpret both sentences within the same situation, and that situation > satisfies the presupposition, then of course they get the same truth > value. Is that all that's meant? Yes, that's about it. > Or do you mean something stronger, that > when speaking I can substitute one for the other and expect to convey > the same information? I don't see how to get the latter. How is it stronger? When speaking, I am describing some situation, and therefore I can substitute one for the other and expect to convey the same information. ma'a xrxe