Contents -- Acknowledgements -- General Preface -- 1 Introduction -- 1.1 Two conceptions of reference -- 1.2 NPs -- 1.2.1 NPs with determiners -- 1.2.2 NPs in sentences -- 1.3 The contents and structure of this book -- 1.4 Punctuation -- 2 Foundations -- 2.1 Mill -- 2.1.1 Denotation and connotation -- 2.1.2 Mill on proper names -- 2.1.3 Mill on propositions -- 2.1.4 Summary -- 2.2 Frege -- 2.2.1 Identity statements -- 2.2.2 Sense and reference -- 2.2.3 Compositionality and the sense and reference of sentences -- 2.2.4 Frege on propositional attitudes -- 2.2.5 Frege on proper names -- 2.2.6 Summary and comments -- 2.3 Russell -- 2.3.1 Quantification -- 2.3.2 Russell's analysis of definite descriptions -- 2.3.3 Russell on propositional attitudes -- 2.3.4 Russell on proper names -- 2.4 Comparisons of Mill, Frege, and Russell -- 2.4.1 Sense vs reference -- 2.4.2 Definite descriptions -- 2.4.3 Empty NPs -- 2.4.4 Propositional attitude contexts -- 2.4.5 Proper names -- 2.5 Concluding remarks -- 3 Subsequent developments -- 3.1 Semantic scope -- 3.1.1 Quantificational NPs -- 3.1.2 Some other sentence operators -- 3.1.3 Scope ambiguities -- 3.1.4 Modal operators -- 3.1.5 Some complications -- 3.1.6 Summary -- 3.2 Possible worlds, extensions, and intensions -- 3.2.1 Possible worlds -- 3.2.2 Extensions -- 3.2.3 Intensions -- 3.2.4 A note about time -- 3.3 Extensionality and intensionality -- 3.3.1 Extensionality -- 3.3.2 Intensionality -- 3.4 Propositions -- 3.4.1 Propositions as sets of possible worlds -- 3.4.2 Propositions as sets of situations -- 3.4.3 Intensional structure -- 3.4.4 Russellian singular propositions -- 3.4.5 Summary -- 3.5 Existence independence -- 3.6 Summary -- 4 The proper treatment of quantification -- 4.1 Grice and conversational implicatures -- 4.2 Introduction to Montague's work -- 4.3 Two problems -- 4.3.1 Rampant intensionality?.

4.3.2 Quantificational NPs and generalized quantifiers -- 4.4 Overview of the PTQ grammar -- 4.4.1 The English fragment -- 4.4.2 IL -- 4.4.3 The translation rules -- 4.5 Some examples -- 4.6 Individuals vs individual concepts -- 4.7 Proper names -- 4.8 Summary and developments -- 4.8.1 Barwise and Cooper (1981) on generalized quantifiers -- 4.8.2 Partee (1986) on type-shifting -- 4.9 Concluding remarks -- 5 Proper names -- 5.1 Review: Mill, Frege, and Russell -- 5.2 The cluster view -- 5.3 The return to Mill's view -- 5.3.1 Descriptions neither necessary nor sufficient -- 5.3.2 Kripke's modal argument -- 5.3.3 Natural kind terms -- 5.4 The new theory of reference -- 5.4.1 What connects names with referents? -- 5.4.2 What is the semantic contribution of a proper name? -- 5.4.3 Direct reference, rigid designation, singular and object-dependent propositions -- 5.5 Problems! -- 5.6 Solutions? Part 1: metalinguistic approaches -- 5.6.1 Quotational approaches -- 5.6.2 Causal description theories -- 5.6.3 ''The bearer of N'' -- 5.7 Kripke's puzzle -- 5.7.1 London/Londres and Paderewski -- 5.7.2 Metalinguistic responses -- 5.8 Solutions? Part 2: hidden indexical and bite-the-bullet approaches -- 5.8.1 Hidden indexical theories -- 5.8.2 Bite-the bullet-approaches -- 5.9 Summary and conclusions -- 6 Definite descriptions -- 6.1 Review -- 6.1.1 The views of Mill, Frege, and Russell -- 6.1.2 Comparison of referential and quantificational views -- 6.2 Strawson's objections to Russell -- 6.2.1 Expressions vs uses of expressions -- 6.2.2 Presupposition vs assertion -- 6.2.3 Incomplete descriptions -- 6.2.4 Summary -- 6.3 Donnellan's referential-attributive distinction -- 6.3.1 Introduction of the referential construal -- 6.3.2 Semantic analyses -- 6.3.3 Kripke's pragmatic analysis -- 6.3.4 Defense of the semantic analyses -- 6.4 Indefinite descriptions.

6.5 Concluding remarks -- 7 Plurals and generics -- 7.1 Plurals and mass terms -- 7.1.1 Link's analysis -- 7.1.2 Plural and mass definite descriptions -- 7.2 Distributive, collective, and cumulative readings -- 7.3 Genericity -- 7.3.1 Statement genericity -- 7.3.2 Bare NPs-Carlson's analysis -- 7.3.3 Generic uses of singular descriptions -- 7.3.4 Bare NPs-an alternative analysis -- 7.4 The average American -- 7.5 Concluding remarks -- 8 Indexicality and pronouns -- 8.1 Character and content -- 8.2 Essential indexicals? -- 8.2.1 Belief states -- 8.2.2 Belief de se -- 8.3 Index vs denotation -- 8.4 Demonstrative NPs -- 8.5 The interpretation of (third-person) pronouns: reference, coreference, and binding -- 8.5.1 The ''free variable'' interpretation -- 8.5.2 Dynamic semantics -- 8.5.3 Quantificationally bound pronouns -- 8.5.4 Non-quantificational binding -- 8.5.5 Plural pronouns -- 8.6 Pronouns and descriptions -- 8.6.1 Bound descriptions -- 8.6.2 Descriptive pronouns -- 8.7 Concluding remarks -- 9 Definiteness, strength, partitives, and referentiality -- 9.1 Existential sentences -- 9.2 Characterizations of ''definite NP'' -- 9.2.1 Uniqueness -- 9.2.2 Familiarity -- 9.2.3 Non-null intersection -- 9.2.4 Type e -- 9.3 Strong and weak -- 9.4 Partitive NPs -- 9.5 Concluding remarks -- 10 NPs in discourse -- 10.1 Pronouns in discourse -- 10.1.1 Donkey pronouns -- 10.1.2 Dynamic semantics and unselective binding -- 10.1.3 E-type pronouns -- 10.1.4 Some remaining issues -- 10.2 Choosing NPs in discourse -- 10.2.1 Prince (1981b, 1992) -- 10.2.2 Ariel (1988, 1990) -- 10.2.3 Gundel, Hedberg, and Zacharski (1993, 2001) -- 10.2.4 What is encoded? -- 10.3 Referents -- 10.3.1 Discourse referents -- 10.3.2 Nonexistent entities -- 10.4 Concluding remarks -- 11 Taking stock -- 11.1 Individual concepts -- 11.2 Which NPs can be used to refer?.

11.3 Which NPs (if any) have a (singular) referent? -- 11.4 Concluding remarks -- References -- Index -- A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- Z.