PUBLICATIONS

Abstract:

Copredication is the phenomenon whereby two or more predicates seem to require that their argument denotes different things. The denotation of words that copredicate has been broadly discussed. In this paper I investigate the metaphysics behind this question. Thus, mereological theories of dot objects propose that these nouns denote complex entities. On the contrary, others have proposed that they denote bare particulars and the Activation Package theory proposes that they stand for multiple denotations. Following an Activation-Package theory, My aim is to psychologize the idea of complex objects. Thus, copredicative nouns do not denote complex entities, but they stand for complex knowledge structures and each sense has its own denotation. I claim that this theory contribute to the understanding of copredication and solves some of the metaphyisical question that arises from it.

Keywords: polysemy, copredication, denotation, truth-conditions, mereological theories, activation packages.

You can find it here

Abstract:

It is still an open question how senses of inherent polysemous words are represented and interpreted. Empirical results are not conclusive about the representation of polysemy. Therefore, different representation models try to give an answer about the puzzle of representation of polysemous words in general and of inherent polysemous words in particular. Inherent polysemous words are those that have several related senses that allow copredication, which occurs when one polysemous word is used to express simultaneously two (or more) related senses in a sentence. Ortega-Andrés and Vicente (2019) propose a rich semantic approach that explains the interpretation of copredicative sentences. This chapter has three goals: (1) I discuss and classify underspecification approaches about the representation of polysemous words; (2) I analyze some empirical results and their contributions to the debate about the representation of polysemy and inherent polysemy; and (3) I argue that the rich account that Ortega-Andrés and Vicente give a plausible explanation about the representation of inherent polysemous words.

Keywords: copredication, polysemy, underspecification, sense, meaning, activation packages.

You can find the book here

Abstract:

Many word forms in natural language are polysemous, but only some of them allow for co-predication, that is, they allow for simultaneous predications selecting for two different meanings or senses of a nominal in a sentence. In this paper, we try to explain (i) why some groups of senses allow co-predication and others do not, and (ii) how we interpret co-predicative sentences. The paper focuses on those groups of senses that allow co-predication in an especially robust and stable way. We argue, using these cases, but focusing particularly on the multiply polysemous word school, that the senses involved in co-predication form especially robust activation packages, which allow hearers and readers to access all the different senses in interpretation.

Keywords: polysemy , co-predication , co-activation , lexical semantics , representation , activation packages 

Full-text available here

Resumen:

La tesis de que los hablantes de distintas lenguas presentan diferencias cognitivas ha sido defendida por lingüistas, psicólogos y filósofos. Muchos resultados dan a entender que existe una correlación entre lenguaje y pensamiento, pero no hay una explicación teórica precisa sobre cómo influye el lenguaje a la cognición. El objetivo de estas páginas es estudiar qué mecanismos son más explicativos de los resultados empíricos. Para ello, se analizan algunos estudios empíricos y se extraen cinco requisitos que la explicación teórica del fenómeno debe cumplir. Se analizan cinco explicaciones y se argumenta a favor de la tesis de la re-representación.

Abstract:

The thesis that speakers of different languages show cognitive differences has been supported by linguistics, psychologist and philosophers. Many results suggest that there is a correlation between language and thought, but there is not a precise theoretical explanation of how language influences cognition. The aim of this paper is to analyze which explanatory mechanisms give an account of the results. First, I will analyze some empirical studies. Second, I will sketch five possible theoretical explanations. I argue for the theory of re-representation.

Full-text available here 

El Neowhorfismo propone que el lenguaje natural -LN desde ahora- tiene un papel fundamental en la formación de algunas categorías mentales del pensamiento abstracto y relacional. Esta tesis se extrae de los resultados de trabajos empíricos llevados a cabo por lingüistas, psicólogos, antropólogos, etc. Sin embargo, no hay un veredicto final acerca de cuál es el rol que ocupa el LN en la estructura conceptual (Vicente y Martínez-Manrique, 2013). De ahí que sea importante aclarar cuáles de las tesis son realmente defendibles por los estudios empíricos. El objetivo de este trabajo es analizar qué papel tiene el LN, cómo influye en la cognición y si la teoría de la redescripción de representaciones es una buena explicación de los resultados empíricos. Esta tesis tiene consecuencias importantes en cómo entendemos la mente y cómo concebimos la relación entre el LN y el pensamiento, no sólo para la filosofía, sino también para ciencias como la psicolingüística, la lingüística, la piscología y la antropología. 

Full text here