1
|
(i)
|
Is
a p.r.o.
|
| |
(ii)
|
Not
a p.r.o. Fails test 1. (Also fails test 2, since the sentence could
be true even if John were the only thing in the world.)
|
| |
(iii)
|
Not a p.r.o.
Fails test 1. Even though there is such a person as the first person
to swim the English Channel (Captain Webb), this sentence's truth
does not depend on this fact.
|
| |
(iv)
|
Ambiguous.
The answer depends on whether it is being said (wrongly, of course)
that John wrote a story about a real person (in which case it is
a p.r.o.), or whether it is being said that John wrote a story which
went, perhaps, "Once upon a time someone swam the Atlantic
for the first time. She…" In that case it fails tests 1 and
3. (It fails test 3 because, even if there were such a person, and
it was, say, Captain Webb, our sentence could be true without its
also being true that John wrote a book about Captain Webb.)
|
| |
(v)
|
Is
a p.r.o. (Notice that the inverted commas are underlined. So the
designator refers to the book.
|
|
(vi) |
Not a p.r.o.
(This time the inverted commas are not underlined.) Fails all three
tests.
|
|
(vii) |
Ambiguous,
perhaps. The answer depends on whether the designator is intended
to capture Peter's way of thinking about things, in which case it
is not a p.r.o.(fails tests 1 and 3); or whether it is a (misguided)
claim about a real person about whom Peter is said to have a belief,
in which case it is a p.r.o.
|
| |
(viii) |
This
is surely not ambiguous. The speaker could hardly be intending to
attribute to Peter the belief, "The first person to swim the
Atlantic was unable to swim". So presumably the speaker believes
that there was such a person and that one of the beliefs that Peter
had about this person (not knowing of his feat) was that he was
unable to swim. So it is a p.r.o.
|
| |
(ix) |
Ambiguous,
perhaps. However, it is most likely that it is saying that "the
first person to swim the Atlantic was unable to swim" could
not have been true. (That is, the alleged impossibility is de
dicto.) In that case it is not a p.r.o. Fails all three tests.
|
| |
(x) |
Here
the modality is presumably meant de re. (It is hardly likely
that what is being said is that "The first person to swim the
Atlantic was not able to swim" might have been true.) So it
is a p.r.o.
|
|
(xi) |
Perhaps
ambiguous, but surely most likely a p.r.o., in spite of the intentional
context. (You may disagree.)
|
|
(xii) |
Perhaps
ambiguous, but surely most likely not a p.r.o. The speaker is presumably
attributing to John a belief in the long legged scissor man, but
need not be committed to such a belief himself. So it fails test
1. It also fails 3. Maybe there is such a person as the long legged
scissor man. Maybe it is the nice Mr Jones from next door. But John
may not be afraid of Mr Jones.
|
| |
(xiii) |
Not
a p.r.o. Fails test 3 – even if Tony Blair is Prime Minister, it
is not true that Tony Blair is always the First Lord of the Treasury.
But the sentence is true. It also fails test 1, because the truth
of the sentence does not depend on there being just one thing which
is the Prime Minister (given that it is not talking about the present).
Does it pass test 2? That depends on whether the truth of the sentence
depends on there being someone at some time or other who is the
Prime Minister. (The role of the sentence, of course, is to say
something general about holders of the office. It would be best
translated as something of the form "x[Fx®Gx] - or, perhaps, [$xFxÙ"x[Fx®Gx]], given that "x[Fx®Gx] will be true if there is nothing which
is F.)
|
|
(xiv) |
Not
a p.r.o. Again it is clearly intended to say something general.
It certainly fails test 1, since the truth of the sentence does
not require there to be just one thing which is the whale – or even
anything which is the whale. Though it does, perhaps, require
that something is a whale.
|
| |
(xv) |
Not a p.r.o.
Again this is saying something general. Fails test 1. Its truth
does not depend on there being such a thing as the-square-of-an-odd-number
(nor on there being just one such thing.) (There is no answer to
the question, "Which thing is the square of an odd number?";
and the truth of the sentence does not require there to be.)
|
| |
(xvi) |
Is
a p.r.o. (Of course, there isn't such a thing as the highest prime
number; but for the sentence to be true there would have to be such
a number. So the designator passes test 1.)
|
| |
(xvii) |
Not a p.r.o.
Fails test 1 – indeed the truth of the sentence depends on there
not being such a thing as Father Christmas.
|
| |
(xviii) |
Not a p.r.o.
Fails test 1. For the sentence to be true it is not required that
the removal of the safety net should actually exist (occur); what
is required is that, if it occurred, it would be dangerous
|
|
(xix) |
This,
on the other hand, is a p.r.o.
|
| |
(xx) |
Fails test
3. Peter was Andrew's brother. But our sentence's truth does not
require it to be true that Andrew's brother was so called because
of his steadfast character.
|
| |
(xxi) |
Presumably
this is a p.r.o. The sentence does not say that Peter was
called "Peter" after his grandfather. It would be true
if he was called "Peter John" because his grandfather
was called "John".
|
| |
(xxii) |
Not
a p.r.o. Fails test 3. Tony Blair is the Prime Minister (at the
time of writing), but it is not true that Tony Blair used to be
John Major. One might protest that the context means that we have
to take "the Prime Minister" to be referring to an earlier
Prime Minister, and that it is true that John Major used to be John
Major. One might question the last statement, but it is in any case
not true that we have to take "the Prime Minister" to
be referring to an earlier Prime Minister. Which earlier Prime Minister
would it be referring to? In fact, in the absence of anything to
suggest a different time, if it were referring to anyone,
it would be referring to someone who is Prime Minister now. (See
the next example.) So we are right to say it fails test 3. In fact,
of course, it is not referring to anyone at all.
|
| |
(xxiii) |
This,
on the other hand, is a p.r.o. (And it refers to the present Prime
Minister.)
|