Abstract
This paper advances an approach to presupposition rooted in the concept of commitment, a dialectical notion weaker than truth and belief. It investigates ancient medieval dialectical theories and develops the insights thereof for analyzing how presuppositions are evaluated and why a proposition is presupposed. In particular, at a pragmatic level, presuppositions are reconstructed as the conclusions of implicit arguments from presumptive reasoning, grounded on presumptions of different type and nature. A false (or rather unaccepted) presupposition can be thus represented as the outcome of a conflict of presumptions – the ones used by the speaker and the ones commonly accepted or backed by evidence. From an interpretative perspective, this defaulted presumptive reasoning can be explained by comparing the available presumptions and repaired by replacing the weaker and unacceptable ones.
About the author
Fabrizio Macagno (Ph.D. UCSC, Milan, 2008) works as a researcher and invited auxiliary professor at the Universidade Nova de Lisboa. He is author of more than 80 papers on definition, presupposition, argumentation schemes, and dialogue analysis published on major international peer-reviewed journals such as Journal of Pragmatics, Intercultural Pragmatics, Argumentation, and Philosophy and Rhetoric. His most important publications include the books Argumentation Schemes (CUP 2008), Emotive language in argumentation (CUP 2014), and Interpreting straw man argumentation (Springer 2017).
References
Abaelardus, Petrus. 1970. Dialectica. Lambertus Marie De Rijk (Ed.), Assen: Van Gorcum.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, St Thomas. 1961. Commentary on the metaphysics of Aristotle. John Rowan (Ed.), Chicago: Henry Regnery Co.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, St Thomas. 1962. Expositio libri Peryermeneias. Oeste, Jea. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, St Thomas. 1990. Summa Theologiae: Volume 11, Man: 1a. 75-83. Timothy Suttor (Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, St Thomas. 2006. Summa Theologiae: Volume 32, Consequences of Faith: 2a2ae. 8-16. Thomas Gilby (Ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas & Alex Lascarides. 1998. The semantics and pragmatics of presupposition. Journal of Semantics 15(3). 239–300. doi:10.1093/jos/15.3.239.Search in Google Scholar
Ashworth, Jennifer. 1973. Existential Assumptions in Late Medieval Logic. American Philosophical Quarterl 10(2). 141–147.Search in Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David. 1991. Topic/comment, presupposition, logical form and focus stress implicatures: The case of focal particles only and also. Journal of Semantics 8(1–2). 127–147.10.1093/jos/8.1-2.127Search in Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David. 2004. Descriptions, linguistic topic/ comment,and negative existentials: A case study in the application of linguistic theory to problems in the philosophy of language. In Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.), Descriptions and beyond, 342–360. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David. 2005. Logic, meaning, and conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195133004.001.0001. http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195133004.001.0001/acprof-9780195133004Search in Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David. 2008. Presupposition. In Laurence Horn & Gregory Ward (eds.), The Handbook of pragmatics, 29–52. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd. doi:10.1002/9780470756959.ch2.Search in Google Scholar
Atlas, Jay David & Stephen Levinson. 1981. It-clefts, informativeness and logical form: Radical pragmatics (revised standard version). In Peter Cole (ed.), Radical pragmatics, 1–62. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Bach, Kent. 1999. The myth of conventional implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 22. 237–366.10.1023/A:1005466020243Search in Google Scholar
Beaver, David. 2010. Have you noticed that your belly button lint colour is related to the colour of your clothing. In Rainer Bäuerle, Uwe Reyle & Thomas Zimmerman (eds.), Presuppositions and Discourse: Essays Offered to Hans Kamp, 65–99. Oxford: Elsevier.10.1163/9789004253162_004Search in Google Scholar
Beyssade, Claire & Jean-Marie Marandin. 2006. The speech act assignment problem revisited: Disentangling speaker’s commitment from speaker’s call on addressee. In Olivier Bonami & Patricia Cabredo Hofherr (eds.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics, 37–68. vol. 6. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Paris Sorbonne.Search in Google Scholar
Beyssade, Claire & Jean-Marie Marandin. 2009. Commitment: Une attitude dialogique. Langue française 162(2). Armand Colin/Dunod. 89. doi:10.3917/lf.162.0089. (30 September, 2016). http://www.cairn.info/revue-langue-francaise-2009-2-page-89.htmSearch in Google Scholar
Brennan, Susan & Herbert Clark. 1996. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22(6). 1482–1493.10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1482Search in Google Scholar
Capone, Alessandro. 2013. The pragmatics of pronominal clitics and propositional attitudes. Intercultural Pragmatics 10(3). 459–485. doi:10.1515/ip-2013-0020.Search in Google Scholar
Capone, Alessandro. 2017. Presuppositions as conversational phenomena. Lingua 198. 22–37.doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2017.06.014.Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620539Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert & Susan Brennan. 1991. Grounding in communication. In Lauren Resnick, John Levine & Stephanie Teasley (eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 127–149. Washington: American Psychological Association.10.1037/10096-006Search in Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1966. “Le roi de France est sage”. Implication logique et Présupposition linguistique. Etudes de linguistique appliquée 4. 39–47.Search in Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1968. Le structuralisme en linguistique. In Oswald Ducrot & Tzvetan Todorov (eds.), Qu’est-ce que le structuralisme?, 13–96. Paris: Seuil.Search in Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1984. Le dire et le dit. Paris: Minuit.Search in Google Scholar
Fintel, Kai von. 2008. What is Presupposition Accommodation, Again?. Philosophical Perspectives 22(1). 137–170. doi:10.1111/j.1520-8583.2008.00144.x.Search in Google Scholar
Fintel, Kai Von. 2004. Would you believe it? The King of France is back! (Presuppositions and truth-value intuitions). In Marga Reimer & Anne Bezuidenhout (eds.), Descriptions and Beyond, 315–341. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1948. Sense and Reference. The Philosophical Review 57(3). 209–230.10.1515/9783111546216-003Search in Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. A solution to the projection problem. In Oh Choon-Kyu & David Dinneen (eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 11: Presupposition, 57–89. vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar
Geurts, Bart. 1999. Presuppositions and Pronouns. Oxford: Elsevier.Search in Google Scholar
Geurts, Bart. 2017. Presupposition and givenness. In Yan Huang (ed.), Oxford handbook of pragmatics, 180–198. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199697960.013.21Search in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1994. An Update Semantics for Dialogue. In Harry Bunt, Reinhard Muskens & Gerrit Rentier (eds.), Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Semantics, 111–120. Tilburg: Institute for language technology and artificial intelligence.Search in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan. 1996. Dynamics and the semantics of dialogue. In Jerry Seligman & Dag Westerstahl (eds.), Logic, language and computation 1, 221–237. Stanford, CA: CSLI publications.Search in Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel, Ari Drucker, Ofer Fein & Itamar Mendelson. 2015. Default Sarcastic Interpretations: On the Priority of Nonsalient Interpretations. Discourse Processes 52(3). 173–200. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2014.954951. (24 November, 2016).Search in Google Scholar
Giora, Rachel, Shir Givoni, Vered Heruti & Ofer Fein. 2017. The Role of Defaultness in Affecting Pleasure: The Optimal Innovation Hypothesis Revisited. Metaphor and Symbol 32(1). 1–18. doi:10.1080/10926488.2017.1272934.Search in Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K. & Thorstein Fretheim. 2004. Topic and Focus. In Laurence Horn & Gregory Ward (Ed.), The Handbook of Pragmatics(1974), 175–196. London: Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9780470756959.ch8.Search in Google Scholar
Hamblin, Charles Leonard. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen.Search in Google Scholar
Hispanus, Petrus. 1990. Peter of Spain: Language in Dispute. An English translation of Peter of Spain’s’ Tractatus’ called afterwards Summulae Logicales, based on the critical edition by LM de Rijk. Francis Dinneen (Ed.), Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Hispanus, Petrus. 1992. Syncategoreumata. Lambertus Maria Rijk & Joke Spruyt (Ed.), Brill: Leiden.Search in Google Scholar
Hobbs, Jerry R. 1979. Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science 3. 67–90. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4.Search in Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 1996. Presupposition and implicature. In Shalom Lappin (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 299–319. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1111/b.9780631207498.1997.00014.xSearch in Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 2011. ONLY XL: The assertoric asymmetry of exponibles. In Ed Cormany, Satoshi Ito & David Lutz (eds.), Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT, 198–222. Ithaca: CLC Publications.10.3765/salt.v0i0.2542Search in Google Scholar
Huang, Yan. 2014. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2013. Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan. 2015. Intracultural communication and intercultural communication: Are they different?. International Review of Pragmatics 7. 171–194. doi:10.1163/18773109-00702002.Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan & Fenghui Zhang. 2009. Activating, seeking, and creating common ground: A socio-cognitive approach. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(2). 331–355. doi:10.1075/pc.17.2.06kec.Search in Google Scholar
Kecskes, Istvan & Fenghui Zhang. 2013. On the Dynamic Relations Between Common Ground and Presupposition. In Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo & Marco Carapezza (eds.), Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics, Perspectives in Pragmatics, 375–395. Philosophy & Psychology 2. Cham: Springer.doi:10.1007/978-3-319-01014-4_15.Search in Google Scholar
Kempson, Ruth. 1975. Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred. 1992. Alltagslogik: Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart, Germany: Fromman-Holzboog.Search in Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred. 2001. Modern revivals of Aristotle’s and Cicero’s Topics: Toulmin, Perelman, Anscombre/Ducrot. Journal of Latin Linguistics 7(1). 17–34.10.1515/joll.2001.7.1.17Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen. 2000. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/5526.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1979. Scorekeeping in a language game. Journal of Philosophical Logic 8(1). 339–359. doi:10.1007/BF00258436.Search in Google Scholar
Libera, Alain De. 2011. Dénomination extrinsèque et « changement cambridgien ». Éléments pour une archéologie médiévale de la subjectivité. In Kent Emery, Russell Friedman & Andreas Speer (eds.), Philosophy and Theology in the Long Middle Ages, 451–470. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/ej.9789004169425.i-1006.73Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio. 2012a. Reconstructing and Assessing the Conditions of Meaningfulness: An Argumentative Approach to Presupposition. In Henrique Ribeiro (ed.), Inside Arguments: Logic and the Study of Argumentation, 247–268. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio. 2012b. Presumptive reasoning in interpretation. Implicatures and conflicts of presumptions. Argumentation 26(2). Springer Netherlands. 233–265. doi:10.1007/s10503-011-9232-9.Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio. 2015. Presupposition as argumentative reasoning. In Alessandro Capone & Jacob Mey (eds.), Interdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society, 465–487. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-12616-6_18.Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio & Sarah Bigi. 2017. Understanding misunderstandings. Presuppositions and presumptions in doctor-patient chronic care consultations. Intercultural Pragmatics 14(1). 49–75. doi:10.1515/ip-2017-0003.Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio & Alessandro Capone. 2016. Uncommon ground. Intercultural Pragmatics 13(2). 151–180. doi:10.1515/ip-2016-0007.Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio & Douglas Walton. 2014. Emotive Language in Argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139565776.Search in Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John. 2015. Abelard’s Argument for Formality. In Laurent Cesalli, Alain De Libera & Frederic Goubier (eds.), Formal Approaches and Natural Languages in the Middle Ages, 41–57. Turnhout: Brepols.Search in Google Scholar
Mackenzie, Jim & Phil Staines. 1999. Hamblin’s Case for Commitment: A Reply to Johnson. Philosophy & rhetoric 32(1). 14–39.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, Christopher. 2001. Obligations and liars. In Mikko Yrjönsuuri (ed.), Medieval Formal Logic-Obligations, Insolubles and Consequences, 63–94. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.10.1007/978-94-015-9713-5_3Search in Google Scholar
Martin, Christopher. 2004. Logic. In Jeffrey Brower & Kevin Guilfoy (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Abelard, 158–199. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL0521772478.006Search in Google Scholar
Martin, Christopher. 2012. Logical consequence. In John Marenbon (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Medieval Philosophy, 289–311. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195379488.013.0013Search in Google Scholar
McCabe, Herbert. 1969. Categories. In Anthony Kenny (ed.), Aquinas. A Collection of Critical Essays, 54–92. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.10.1007/978-1-349-15356-5_4Search in Google Scholar
Novaes Dutilh, Catarina. 2007. Formalizing Medieval Logical Theories: Suppositio, Consequentiae and Obligationes. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-1-4020-5853-0Search in Google Scholar
Potts, Christopher. 2015. Presupposition and implicature. In Shalom Lappin & Chris Fox (eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 168–202. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118882139.ch6Search in Google Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas. 2006. Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511498848. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/9780511498848/type/bookSearch in Google Scholar
Rhonheimer, Martin. 2000. Natural Law and Practical Reason: A Thomist View of Moral Autonomy. New York: Fordham University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1905. On denoting. Mind 14. 479–493.10.4324/9780203822586-6Search in Google Scholar
Schlenker, Philippe. 2008. Be articulate: A pragmatic theory of presupposition projection. Theoretical Linguistics 34(3). 157–212.10.1515/THLI.2008.013Search in Google Scholar
Seuren, Pieter. 2005. Eubulides as a 20th-century semanticist. Language Sciences 27(1). 75–95.10.1016/B978-008043581-7/50054-2Search in Google Scholar
Seuren, Pieter. 2009. Language in Cognition: Language from Within Volume I: Language from Within. Vol. 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199559473.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Seuren, Pieter. 2010. The Logic of Language. Language from Within, volume II. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Sherwood, William. 1968. Treatise on Syncategorematic Words. Norman Kretzmann (Ed.), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Search in Google Scholar
Simons, Mandy. 2003. Presupposition and accommodation: Understanding the Stalnakerian picture. Philosophical Studies 112(3). 251–278.10.1023/A:1023004203043Search in Google Scholar
Simons, Mandy. 2007. Presupposition and cooperation. Carnegie Mellon University. Manuscript.Search in Google Scholar
Simons, Mandy. 2013. On the conversational basis of some presuppositions. In Alessandro Capone, Franco Lo Piparo & Marco Carapezza (eds.), Perspectives on Linguistic Pragmatics, Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology 2, 329–348. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-01014-4_13Search in Google Scholar
Soames, Scott. 1982. How Presuppositions Are Inherited: A Solution to the Projection Problem. Linguistic Inquiry 13(3). 483–545.Search in Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1973. Presuppositions. Journal of philosophical logic 2(4). 447–457. doi:10.1007/bf00262951.Search in Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1974. Pragmatic presuppositions. In Milton Munitz & Peter Unger (eds.), Semantics and Philosophy, 197–214. New York: Press. doi:10.1093/0198237073.003.0003.Search in Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 1984. Inquiry. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 2008. A Response to Abbott on Presupposition and Common Ground. Linguistics and Philosophy 31(5). 539–544.10.1007/s10988-008-9047-9Search in Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter. 1950. On referring. Mind 59(235). 320–344.10.1093/mind/LIX.235.320Search in Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter. 1964. Identifying reference and truth‐values. Theoria 30(2). 96–118. Wiley Online Library.10.1111/j.1755-2567.1964.tb00404.xSearch in Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter. 1971. Identifying Reference and Truth-Values. In Peter Strawson (ed.), Logico-Linguistic Papers, 75–95. London: Methuen.Search in Google Scholar
Thomason, Richmond. 1990. Accommodation, meaning, and implicature: Interdisciplinary foundations for pragmatics. In Philip Cohen, Jerry Morgan & Martha Pollack (eds.), Intentions in communication, 325–364. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen. 1958. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Uckelman, Sara L. 2013. Medieval Disputationes de obligationibus as Formal Dialogue Systems. Argumentation 27(2). 143–166. doi:10.1007/s10503-012-9266-7.Search in Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas. 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807039Search in Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas & Erik Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in dialogue. Albany: State University of New York Press.Search in Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas, Christopher Reed & Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511802034.Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston