Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:41:23.347Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Infinitive Perfect and Backward Causation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Kjell Johan Sæbø
Kjell Johan Sæbø
Affiliation:
Germanistisk institut vd. A, Universitetet i Oslo, Blindern, Oslo 3
Get access

Abstract

The present paper represents an attempt to explain the semantically deviant nature of causative constructions with present perfect effect sentences. As far as I known, such constructions have not been commented upon in the literature on causativity. I show that any counterfactual analysis of the traditional sort will bring them out as synthetic sentences, provided they are syntactically well-formed. On the other hand, if the notion os counterfactural dependence is re-interpreted along the lines of branching possible worlds, they can be shown to be systematically contradictory. I discuss the various revisions of the truth conditions for tensed formulae and of the general semantic framework which are necessary to accomplish this.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , December 1980, pp. 161 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Åqvist, L. 1974: A New Approach to the Logical Theory of Actions and Causality. In Stenlund, S. (ed.): Logical Theory and Semantics. Reidel, Dordrecht. pp. 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Åqvist, L. 1976: Formal Semantics for Verb Tenses as Analyzed by Reichenbach. In Dijk, , van, T.A. (ed.): Pragmatics of Languagae and Literature. North-Holland, Amsterdam. pp. 229–36.Google Scholar
Cresswell, M. 1977: Interval Semantics and Logical Words. In Rohrer, Ch. (ed.): On the Logical Analysis of Tense and Aspect. TBL Verlag Gunter Narr, Tübingen, pp. 7–29.Google Scholar
Dowty, D.R. 1977: Toward a Semantic Analysis of Verb Aspect and the English “Imperfective” Progressive. In Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 45–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. 1971: Some Problems for Case Grammar. In O'Brien, R. (ed.): Report on the 22nd Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies. Georgetown Univ. Press, Washington D.C, pp. 35–56.Google Scholar
Lewis, D. 1973: Causation. In Journal of Philosophy 70, 556–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. 1975: Counterfactuals and Comparative Possiblity. In Hockney, D. (ed.): Contemporary Research in Philosophical Logic and Linguistic Semantics. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 1–29.Google Scholar
Wright, , von, G.H.. 1968: An Essay in Deontic Logic and the General Therory of Action = Acta Philosophia Fennica XXI.Google Scholar