Ellipsis and Nonsentential Speech (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, 81)

★★★★★ 5.0 92 reviews

US$31.06
Price when purchased online
Free shipping Free 30-day returns

We aim to show you accurate product information. Manufacturers, suppliers and others provide what you see here.
US$31.06
Price when purchased online
Free shipping Free 30-day returns

How do you want your item?
You get 30 days free! Choose a plan at checkout.
Shipping
Arrives Aug 19
Free
Pickup
Check nearby
Delivery
Not available

Free 30-day returns Details

Product details

Management number 233515395 Release Date 2026/06/27 List Price US$31.06 Model Number 233515395
Category

The papers in this volume address two main topics: Q1: What is the nature, and especially the scope, of ellipsis in natural l- guage? Q2: What are the linguistic/philosophical implications of what one takes the nature/scope of ellipsis to be? As will emerge below, each of these main topics includes a large sub-part that deals speci?cally with nonsentential speech. Within the ?rst main topic, Q1, there arises the sub-issueofwhethernonsententialspeechfallswithinthescopeofellipsisornot;within the second main topic, Q2, there arises the sub-issue of what linguistic/philosophical implications follow, if nonsentential speech does/does not count as ellipsis. I. THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF ELLIPSIS A. General Issue: How Many Natural Kinds? There are many things to which the label ‘ellipsis’ can be readily applied. But it’s quite unclear whether all of them belong in a single natural kind. To explain, consider a view, assumed in Stainton (2000), Stainton (2004a), and elsewhere. It is the view that there are fundamentally (at least) three very different things that readily get called ‘ellipsis’, each belonging to a distinct kind. First, there is the very broad phenomenon of a speaker omitting information which the hearer is expected to make use of in interpreting an utterance. Included therein, possibly as a special case, is the use of an abbreviated form of speech, when one could have used a more explicit expression. (See Neale (2000) and Sellars (1954) for more on this idea. Read more


Correction of product information

If you notice any omissions or errors in the product information on this page, please use the correction request form below.

Correction Request Form

Customer ratings & reviews

5 out of 5
★★★★★
92 ratings | 38 reviews
How item rating is calculated
View all reviews
5 stars
90% (83)
4 stars
0% (0)
3 stars
0% (0)
2 stars
0% (0)
1 star
10% (9)
Sort by

There are currently no written reviews for this product.