Review published In:
The Concept of Reference in the Cognitive Sciences
Edited by Amichai Kronfeld and Lawrence D. Roberts
[Pragmatics & Cognition 6:1/2] 1998
► pp. 339348
References
Barwise, J. and Perry, J.
1983Situations and Attitudes. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bertolet, R.
1980 “The semantic significance of Donnellan’s distinction”. Philosophical Studies 37(3): 281–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981a “Kripke’s speaker’s reference”. Analysis 41(2): 70–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1981b “Referential uses and speaker meaning”. Philosophical Quarterly 31(124): 253–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1986 “Donnellan’s distinctions”. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 64(4): 477–487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990What is Said: A Theory of Indirect Speech Reports. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crimmins, M.
1994Talk About Beliefs. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Devitt, M.
1989 “Against direct reference”. In P. French, T. Uehling, and H. Wettstein (eds), Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol. XIV1, 206–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1996Coming to Our Senses: A Naturalistic Program for Semantic Localism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Donnellan, K.
1966 “Reference and definite descriptions”. Philosophical Review 751: 281–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, D.
1977 “Demonstratives”. In J. Almog, J. Perry, and H. Wettstein (eds), Themes from Kaplan. Oxford: Oxford University Press [1989], 481–563.Google Scholar
Perry, J.
1977 “Frege on demonstratives”. Philosophical Review 861: 474–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Richard, M.
1990Propositional Attitudes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salmon, N.
1982 “Assertion and incomplete definite descriptions”. Philosophical Studies 421: 37–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991 “The Pragmatic fallacy”. Philosophical Studies 631: 83–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wettstein, H.
1981 “Demonstrative reference and definite descriptions”. [Reprinted in H. Wettstein (1991), 35–49]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1983 “The semantic significance of the referential-attributive distinction”. [Reprinted in Wettstein (1991), 50–58]. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1991Has Semantics Rested on a Mistake? And Other Essays. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar