A Comparison of Tichý and Prior’s Approach to Definite Descriptions and the Possibilities of Enrichment of Tichý’s Treatment

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15210%2F24%3A73627020" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15210/24:73627020 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://ttps://doi.org/10.26333/sts.xxxvii1.02" target="_blank" >http://ttps://doi.org/10.26333/sts.xxxvii1.02</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.26333/sts.xxxvii1.02" target="_blank" >10.26333/sts.xxxvii1.02</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

A Comparison of Tichý and Prior’s Approach to Definite Descriptions and the Possibilities of Enrichment of Tichý’s Treatment

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

One of Pavel Tichý’s celebrated observations was that definite descriptions do not denote individuals but individual offices. In our paper, we compare Tichý’s concept of individual offices to the concept proposed by Arthur N. Prior, who differentiated between the strong and the weak “the”. The aim of our paper is to point out parallels and differences. The differences stem in particular from their different approaches to contingency given by their accepted ontology. In addition, we would like to enrich Tichý’sanalysis of individual offices by including certain features of Prior’s concept. The proposed outline might provide a challenge for a more detailed analysis of definite descriptions in Tichý’s Transparent Intensional Logic.

Název v anglickém jazyce

A Comparison of Tichý and Prior’s Approach to Definite Descriptions and the Possibilities of Enrichment of Tichý’s Treatment

Popis výsledku anglicky

One of Pavel Tichý’s celebrated observations was that definite descriptions do not denote individuals but individual offices. In our paper, we compare Tichý’s concept of individual offices to the concept proposed by Arthur N. Prior, who differentiated between the strong and the weak “the”. The aim of our paper is to point out parallels and differences. The differences stem in particular from their different approaches to contingency given by their accepted ontology. In addition, we would like to enrich Tichý’sanalysis of individual offices by including certain features of Prior’s concept. The proposed outline might provide a challenge for a more detailed analysis of definite descriptions in Tichý’s Transparent Intensional Logic.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Studia Semiotyczne

ISSN

0137-6608

e-ISSN

2544-073X

Svazek periodika

37

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

PL - Polská republika

Počet stran výsledku

15

Strana od-do

9-23

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85212123298