メモ：マクファーレン未公刊論文 (2008) 「認識的法助動詞は評価感応的である」

ずいぶん前にチェックしていたのを再チェック：

John McFarlane, "Epistemic modals are assessment-sensitive"
(http://johnmacfarlane.net/epistmod.pdf)

• 1 Introduction

• 2 Against Solipsistic Contextualism
  • 2.1 Third-person assessments
  • 2.2 Retraction
  • 2.3 Disputes
  • 2.4 Semantic blindness?

• 3 Nonsolipsistic Contextualism
  • 3.1 Widening the relevant community
  • 3.2 Objective factors
  • 3.3 Distributed knowledge
  • 3.4 The puzzle

• 4 Non-truth-conditional Approaches
  • 4.1 Epistemic modals as force modifiers
  • 4.2 Interface problems
  • 4.3 Explaining retractions

• 5 A "relativist" approach
  • 5.1 Bicontextuality
  • 5.2 Explaining third-party assessments
  • 5.3 Explaining retractions
  • 5.4 Explaining disputes
  • 5.5 Philosophical debts

• 6 Compositional Semantics
  • 6.1 Baseline: solipsistic contextualism
  • 6.2 Nonsolipsistic contextualism
  • 6.3 Solipsistic relativism
  • 6.4 Monadic "true"

• 7 Tensed Epistemic Modals

• 8 Doubts about the Data
  • 8.1 Limits to retrospective correction?
• 8.2 Ignorant assessors

• 9 Conclusion

「独我論的文脈主義」(Solipsistic Contextualism) ：認識様相はもっぱら話し手の知識に関連づけて理解される：e.g. "Joe might be running" という言明が真であるのは，「ジョンが走っている」ことが話し手の知識によって排除されないときである．