Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007

@cite{yalcin-2007}: Epistemic Contradictions and the Embedding Diagnostic #

@cite{yalcin-2007}

Yalcin (2007) introduced the term epistemic contradiction for sentences of the form p ∧ ◇¬p and ¬p ∧ ◇p, and argued — via their behavior under embedding — that these are semantic contradictions, not merely pragmatic ones (as Moore-style sentences p ∧ ¬Kp are).

The diagnostic battery: Moore sentences become felicitous under embedding ("Suppose it's raining and I don't know it" — fine), while epistemic contradictions remain infelicitous in the same environments. This is the foundational empirical observation grounding the subsequent literature (Mandelkern 2019 @cite{mandelkern-2019}; Klinedinst & Rothschild 2012 @cite{klinedinst-rothschild-2012}; Holliday & Mandelkern 2024 @cite{holliday-mandelkern-2024}).

Three kinds of (in)felicity #

  1. Moore sentences (p ∧ ¬Kp — "It's raining but I don't know that it's raining"): pragmatically odd to assert, but felicitous under embedding. Often credited to Moore (1942) "Russell's Theory of Descriptions".
  2. Epistemic contradictions / Wittgenstein sentences (p ∧ ◇¬p — "It's raining and it might not be raining"): infelicitous even under embedding. The "Wittgenstein" terminology was added by Mandelkern (2019) for the symmetric form ◇¬p ∧ p; Yalcin's original term was "epistemic contradiction." This file uses the unified SentenceType.wittgenstein constructor for both orderings.
  3. Classical contradictions (p ∧ ¬p): always infelicitous, in any environment.

The key empirical generalization: Wittgenstein sentences pattern with classical contradictions (not with Moore sentences) under embedding — suggesting they are semantic contradictions, not pragmatic infelicities.

Embedding environments #

Yalcin's diagnostic uses five embedding environments to distinguish pragmatic from semantic infelicity. Moore sentences become felicitous under all five; Wittgenstein sentences remain infelicitous in all five.

Theory-neutrality caveat #

This is the empirical pattern that the truth-conditional tradition takes to be settled (Yalcin 2007, Mandelkern 2019, Holliday & Mandelkern 2024). Dynamic-semantic accounts (Veltman 1996, Groenendijk-Stokhof-Veltman 1996) and expressivist accounts treat this terrain differently — they do not divide the data into "semantic vs pragmatic" buckets the same way. The empirical judgments recorded here are widely shared; the labels ("semantic," "pragmatic") presuppose some theory of how truth-conditional content interacts with assertion, which is itself contested.

source
inductive Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.SentenceType :
Type

A sentence type: how epistemic modality interacts with assertion.

The .wittgenstein constructor covers both p ∧ ◇¬p (Yalcin's original "epistemic contradiction") and ◇¬p ∧ p (the order Mandelkern (2019) renamed "Wittgenstein sentence"). The two orderings pattern identically under the embedding diagnostic, though dynamic-semantic accounts (Veltman 1996) make them inequivalent.

Instances For
    source
    @[implicit_reducible]
    instance Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instDecidableEqSentenceType :
    DecidableEq SentenceType
    Equations
    source
    def Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instReprSentenceType.repr :
    SentenceType → Nat → Std.Format
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For
      source
      @[implicit_reducible]
      instance Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instReprSentenceType :
      Repr SentenceType
      Equations
      source
      inductive Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.EmbeddingEnv :
      Type

      Embedding environments that distinguish Moore from Wittgenstein.

      Yalcin's five canonical environments. Holliday & Mandelkern (2024) (1c), (8a-c) emphasize that quantifier restrictors and quantifier scopes are also canonical environments where the diagnostic applies; those cases are not yet captured here.

      Instances For
        source
        @[implicit_reducible]
        instance Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instDecidableEqEmbeddingEnv :
        DecidableEq EmbeddingEnv
        Equations
        source
        @[implicit_reducible]
        instance Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instReprEmbeddingEnv :
        Repr EmbeddingEnv
        Equations
        source
        def Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.instReprEmbeddingEnv.repr :
        EmbeddingEnv → Nat → Std.Format
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For
          source
          def Phenomena.Modality.Studies.Yalcin2007.felicitousUnderEmbedding :
          SentenceType → Bool

          Moore sentences become felicitous under embedding; Wittgenstein and classical contradictions remain infelicitous. This is the core diagnostic separating pragmatic from semantic contradiction.

          Currently uniform across EmbeddingEnv cases. The audit-recommended extension to SentenceType → EmbeddingEnv → Bool (3×5 table) plus quantifier_restrictor / quantifier_scope cases per HM 2024 (1c)/(8a-c) is deferred to a separate session.

          Equations
          Instances For