'She' and 'he': Politically correct pronouns

Philosophical Studies 111 (2):173 - 196 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is argued that the pronouns `she' and `he' are disguised complexdemonstratives of the form `that female/male'. Three theories ofcomplex demonstratives are examined and shown to be committed to theview that `s/he' turns out to be an empty term when used to refer toa hermaphrodite. A fourth theory of complex demonstratives, one thatis hermaphrodite friendly, is proposed. It maintains that complexdemonstratives such as `that female/male' and the pronoun `s/he' can succeed in referring to someone independently of his or her gender.This theory incorporates: (i) a multiple proposition view, i.e., theview that an utterance of a sentence containing a complex demonstrativeexpresses two (or more) propositions, namely the background proposition(s)and the official one; (ii) that the referent of a complex demonstrativeis a component of the official proposition expressed whether it satisfiesthe nominal part of the demonstrative expression or not; (iii) that thenominal part of a complex demonstrative only affect the background proposition(s) and (iv) that the utterance inherits its truth-value onlyfrom the official proposition.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,597

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Complex demonstratives and their singular contents.David Braun - 2008 - Linguistics and Philosophy 31 (1):57-99.
Demonstratives, Indexicals, and Tensed Attributions of Belief.Mark Richard - 1982 - Dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst
Complex demonstratives qua singular terms.Eros Corazza - 2003 - Erkenntnis 59 (2):263 - 283.
Why Bare Demonstratives Need Not Semantically Refer.J. P. Smit - 2012 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 42 (1):43-66.
Pronouns: anaphora and demonstration.R. M. Sainsbury - 2005 - In R. M. Sainsbury (ed.), Reference Without Referents. Oxford, England and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press UK.
A study on proposition and sentence in english grammar.Mudasir A. Tantray - 2016 - International Journal Of Humanities and Social Studies 4 (02):20-25.
Complex demonstratives.Emma Borg - 2000 - Philosophical Studies 97 (2):229-249.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
160 (#145,274)

6 months
11 (#354,748)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eros Corazza
University of the Basque Country

References found in this work

Reference and definite descriptions.Keith S. Donnellan - 1966 - Philosophical Review 75 (3):281-304.
Generalized quantifiers and natural language.John Barwise & Robin Cooper - 1981 - Linguistics and Philosophy 4 (2):159--219.
Reference and Reflexivity.John Perry - 2001 - Stanford, Calif.: Center for the Study of Language and Inf.
Speaker’s Reference and Semantic Reference.Saul A. Kripke - 1977 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 2 (1):255-276.
Thought without Representation.John Perry & Simon Blackburn - 1986 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 60 (1):137-166.

View all 18 references / Add more references