A Primer on Hyperintensionality

In this chapter I bring hyperintensionality in to the picture. In the previous chapter I introduced classical ands non-classical semantics for deontic modals, and suggested some of the problems they have to face are due to their coarseness of grain. Hyperintensionality is one way to get finer-grained tools.

[1]  Graeme Forbes,et al.  Attitude Problems. An Essay on Linguistic Intensionality , 2008 .

[2]  M. Jago.  The Impossible: An Essay on Hyperintensionality , 2014 .

[3]  Marie Duzí,et al.  Structural Isomorphism of Meaning and Synonymy , 2014, Computación y Sistemas.

[4]  David Ripley.  Structures and circumstances: two ways to fine-grain propositions , 2012, Synthese.

[5]  Dagfinn Føllesdal,et al.  Situation Semantics and the “Slingshot” Argument , 1983 .

[6]  Michael Zakharyaschev,et al.  Modal Logic , 1997, Oxford logic guides.

[7]  Chris Fox,et al.  Type-theoretic logic with an operational account of intensionality , 2013, Synthese.

[8]  Richmond H. Thomason,et al.  A model theory for propositional attitudes , 1980 .

[9]  J. Lambek,et al.  Introduction to higher order categorical logic , 1986 .

[10]  Chris Fox,et al.  Foundations of intensional semantics , 2005 .

[11]  Carl Pollard,et al.  Hyperintensional Questions , 2008, WoLLIC.

[12]  Jens Christian Bjerring.  Non-Ideal Epistemic Spaces , 2010 .

[13]  Carl Pollard,et al.  Agnostic hyperintensional semantics , 2013, Synthese.

[14]  Jens Christian Bjerring.  Impossible worlds and logical omniscience: an impossibility result , 2011, Synthese.

[15]  Reinhard Muskens.  Intensional Models for the Theory of Types , 2007, J. Symb. Log..

[16]  G. Bealer.  Quality and concept , 1982 .

[17]  Bjørn Jespersen,et al.  How hyper are hyperpropositions? , 2010, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[18]  Alonzo Church,et al.  Intensional isomorphism and identity of belief , 1954 .

[19]  Alonzo Church,et al.  A Revised Formulation of the Logic of Sense and Denotation. Alternative (1) , 1993 .

[20]  Shalom Lappin,et al.  Curry Typing, Polymorphism, and Fine‐Grained Intensionality , 2015 .

[21]  Reinhard Muskens,et al.  Higher order modal logic , 2007, Handbook of Modal Logic.

[22]  A. Church.  Outline of a Revised Formulation of the Logic of Sense and Denotation (Part II) , 1973 .

[23]  David J. Israel,et al.  Structured Meanings: The Semantics of Propositional Attitudes. , 1987 .

[24]  Yiannis N. Moschovakis,et al.  A Logical Calculus of Meaning and Synonymy , 2006 .

[25]  Timothy Williamson,et al.  Modal Logic as Metaphysics , 2013 .

[26]  Irene Heim,et al.  Intensional Semantics Lecture Notes , 2005 .

[27]  S. Soames.  Direct Reference, Propositional Attitudes, and Semantic Content , 1987 .

[28]  A. Gibbard.  Meaning and Normativity , 2013 .

[29]  Marie Duzí,et al.  Transparent quantification into hyperintensional objectual attitudes , 2014, Synthese.

[31]  N. Cocchiarella,et al.  Situations and Attitudes. , 1986 .

[32]  Marie Duzí,et al.  Procedural Semantics for Hyperintensional Logic - Foundations and Applications of Transparent Intensional Logic , 2010, Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science.