Indefinite Description Phrase
An Indefinite Description Phrase is a referencing phrase that introduce entities that are new.
- AKA: Indefinite Description, Indefinite Noun Phrase, Indefinite Description Expression.
- Context:
- It can range from (typically) being an Indefinite Noun Phrase to being a ...
- In English, it can that the form of "the X", where X is a noun phrase that ...
- Example(s):
- “a man called John”
- “John met a person”
- “some man is being obnoxious”
- “She is ambitious”, see (Bach, 2008).
- …
- Counter-Example(s):
- “the tallest woman in the world”
- “the first person in space”
- “the father of Mahatma Gandhi.”.
- a Non-proper Definite Description Phrase, such as: “the first person on Mars.”, and “the largest prime number."”.
- See: Phrase, Definite Description Phrase.
References
2009a
- (Wikipedia, 2009) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_descriptions#Indefinite_descriptions
- Take as an example of an indefinite description the sentence "some man is being obnoxious". Russell analyzes this phrase into the following component parts (with 'x' and 'y' representing variables):
- 1. there is an x such that x is a man.
- 2. x is being obnoxious.
- Thus, an indefinite description (of the general form 'an F is G') becomes the following existentially quantified phrase in classic symbolic logic (where 'x' and 'y' are variables and 'F' and 'G' are predicates):
- ∃x[Fx & Gx]
- Informally, this reads as follows: there is something such that it is F and G.
- Take as an example of an indefinite description the sentence "some man is being obnoxious". Russell analyzes this phrase into the following component parts (with 'x' and 'y' representing variables):
2009b
- http://www.geocities.com/n_arkw2/Dissertation/Diss.6.Desc.pdf
- QUOTE: Definite noun phrases (including proper nouns and definite descriptions) are used to refer to something or someone that the hearer is expected to be able to identify on hearing the noun phrase in the given context. If the referent has not been introduced to the hearer or to the discourse, the speaker should refer to the referent in his or her mind by an indefinite noun phrase such as “a man called John” or by a definite description which uniquely identifies the referent to the hearer (e.g., “the father of Ronald Reagan”--provided that the hearer knows whom “Ronald Reagan” denotes).
2008
- (Bach, 2008) ⇒ Kent Bach. (2008). “On Referring and Not Referring.” In: Reference: Interdisciplinary Perspectives." Jeanette K. Gundel and Nancy Hedberg, editors. Oxford University Press.
- QUOTE: It is generally assumed, and occasionally argued, that there is indeed a class of referring expressions — indexicals, demonstratives, and proper names — and that they aren’t just eminently capable of being used to refer, which nobody can deny, but that they themselves refer, albeit relative to contexts. There is general consensus that at least some expressions do this, but there is considerable dispute about which ones. It is rare to find a philosopher who includes indefinite descriptions among referring expressions, but some are liberal enough to include definite descriptions. Some reject definites but include demonstrative descriptions (complex demonstratives) on their list. Some balk at descriptions of any kind referring but have no qualms about proper names. Some have doubts about proper names referring, but readily include indexicals and simple demonstratives. Anyhow, I can’t recall anyone actually responding to Strawson’s argument. Instead, what I’ve observed is that philosophers slide down a verbal slippery slope. Suppose Madonna says, referring to Britney Spears, “She is ambitious.”
With this slippery slide in mind, from now on (except when discussing others’ views) instead of using ‘referring expression’ I’ll use the marginally better phrase ‘singular term’ for expressions that can be used to refer.
By ‘reference’ I will mean singular reference only (I will not be considering whether general terms refer and, if so, to what), and when I describe a use as nonreferential, I will not mean that reference fails but that there is no attempt to refer.
footnote: Although our topic is singular reference, there is a broad sense in which every expression refers (or at least every expression that has a semantic value that contributes to the propositional content of sentences in which it occurs) … In any case, the phrase ‘referring expression’ is ordinarily limited to any expression whose propositional contribution is its referent (if it has one)..
S5 Often the only way to refer to something is by using a definite description.
- QUOTE: It is generally assumed, and occasionally argued, that there is indeed a class of referring expressions — indexicals, demonstratives, and proper names — and that they aren’t just eminently capable of being used to refer, which nobody can deny, but that they themselves refer, albeit relative to contexts. There is general consensus that at least some expressions do this, but there is considerable dispute about which ones. It is rare to find a philosopher who includes indefinite descriptions among referring expressions, but some are liberal enough to include definite descriptions. Some reject definites but include demonstrative descriptions (complex demonstratives) on their list. Some balk at descriptions of any kind referring but have no qualms about proper names. Some have doubts about proper names referring, but readily include indexicals and simple demonstratives. Anyhow, I can’t recall anyone actually responding to Strawson’s argument. Instead, what I’ve observed is that philosophers slide down a verbal slippery slope. Suppose Madonna says, referring to Britney Spears, “She is ambitious.”
2003
- (Gutiérrez-Rexach, 2003) ⇒ Javier Gutiérrez-Rexach, editor. (2003). “Semantics: Noun phrase classes." Taylor & Francis. ISBN:0415266351
1905
- (Russel, 1905) ⇒ Bertrand Russell. (1905). “On Denoting.” In: Mind, 14.