Documentation

Studies.AlonsoOvalle2009

Alonso-Ovalle (2009): counterfactuals, correlatives, and disjunction #

A would-counterfactual with a disjunctive antecedent is read as checking the consequent in the closest worlds of each disjunct, which a minimal-change semantics with Boolean or cannot do: on the bumper-crop scenario (1) it hands the modal the union and predicts the counterfactual true (bumperCrop_boolean). The paper keeps minimal change and instead lets or introduce its disjuncts as Hamblin alternatives (10) and treats conditionals as correlatives: the if-clause universally quantifies over the alternatives (25) and the consequent, abstracted over the propositional anaphor then, supplies the modal (24). The composition is distributiveImp for would and DistributiveMight for might; it validates Simplification (27), makes (1) false (bumperCrop_alternatives), and leaves the negated (29) true when one simplification holds, where a sum with the homogeneity presupposition (33) gives a gap (hitler_negation, homogeneity_ne_false).

Rival derivations fail. A strict conditional makes Simplification a monotonicity inference (strict_simplification) but not for the dual might (strictMight_not_simplifying), and Stalnaker's ◇(would) recovers it (stalnaker_might_simplification) only for epistemic modals. On von Fintel's modal horizon (44)–(45), Simplification is Strawson-valid like Strengthening the Antecedent (horizonWould_anti) but not dynamically valid (horizon_sunCold_undefined). The manner implicature (75)–(76) does not deliver both simplifications (manner_insufficient). Nute's (80) is a contradiction unless a disjunct is impossible (distributive_pair_disjoint_iff) and needs Existential Closure (82) (budget). The paper's verdicts are checked in rows_agree.

References #

Conditionals as correlatives (§2) #

def AlonsoOvalle2009.DistributiveMight {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (S : Finset (Finset W)) (C : Set W) (w : W) :

Might in the consequent (70)–(71) under the universal if-clause (25) holds when the closest worlds of every alternative are compatible with the consequent.

Equations
Instances For
    @[instance_reducible]
    instance AlonsoOvalle2009.instDecidableDistributiveMight {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (S : Finset (Finset W)) (C : Set W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] [Fintype W] [(w : W) → DecidableRel LE.le] [DecidablePred fun (x : W) => x ∈ C] :
    Decidable (DistributiveMight ord S C w)
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.simplification {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (C : Set W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] {A B : Finset W} (h : w ∈ Conditional.distributiveImp ord {A, B} C) :
    w ∈ Conditional.closestImp ord (↑A) C ∧ w ∈ Conditional.closestImp ord (↑B) C

    Simplification (27) says that the disjunctive counterfactual entails each disjunct's.

    theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.simplification_might {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (C : Set W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] {A B : Finset W} (h : DistributiveMight ord {A, B} C w) :

    Simplification for might (54), the extension of §3.3.

    @[reducible, inline]

    The good-weather and cold-sun worlds of the bumper-crop model.

    Equations
    Instances For

      With the disjuncts as alternatives (13) under universal force (26), (1) is false, since the closest cold-sun worlds have no crop.

      Universal quantifier or sum (§2.2.3) #

      theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.homogeneity_ne_false {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (S : Finset (Finset W)) (C : Set W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] [Fintype W] [(w : W) → DecidableRel LE.le] [DecidablePred fun (x : W) => x ∈ C] {A : Finset W} (hA : A ∈ S) (h : w ∈ Conditional.closestImp ord (↑A) C) :

      A sum analysis falsifies a disjunctive counterfactual only when every disjunct's counterfactual fails.

      In (29)–(31) Spain joining Germany is closer than Spain joining the U.S., and Hitler is pleased only in the former.

      Instances For
        @[instance_reducible]
        Equations
        @[instance_reducible]
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        @[reducible, inline]
        Equations
        Instances For

          Downward entailingness (§3) #

          theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.strict_simplification {W : Type u_1} {I : Type u_2} (access : I → Set W) (φ ψ χ : Set W) {i : I} (h : i ∈ Conditional.strictImp access (φ ∪ ψ) χ) :
          i ∈ Conditional.strictImp access φ χ ∧ i ∈ Conditional.strictImp access ψ χ

          A strict conditional is antitone in its antecedent, so Simplification is a monotonicity inference, (37)–(38).

          theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.stalnaker_might_simplification {W : Type u_1} {I : Type u_2} (access : I → Set W) (φ ψ χ : Set W) (E : I → Set I) {i : I} (h : ∃ i' ∈ E i, i' ∈ Conditional.strictImp access (φ ∪ ψ) χ) :
          (∃ i' ∈ E i, i' ∈ Conditional.strictImp access φ χ) ∧ ∃ i' ∈ E i, i' ∈ Conditional.strictImp access ψ χ

          Stalnaker's might counterfactual, epistemic possibility over E of the strict would, inherits Simplification, (60)–(64).

          def AlonsoOvalle2009.expand {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) [DecidableEq W] [Fintype W] [(w : W) → DecidableRel LE.le] (f : W → Finset W) (φ : Finset W) (w : W) :
          Finset W

          Accommodation (44) grows the modal horizon f by every world at least as close as the closest antecedent worlds.

          Equations
          Instances For
            def AlonsoOvalle2009.horizonWould {W : Type u_1} [DecidableEq W] (f : W → Finset W) (φ ψ : Finset W) (w : W) :

            The counterfactual on a horizon (45) holds when every antecedent world in the horizon is a consequent world.

            Equations
            Instances For
              def AlonsoOvalle2009.HorizonReaches {W : Type u_1} [DecidableEq W] (f : W → Finset W) (φ : Finset W) (w : W) :

              The presupposition of (45) is that the horizon reaches the antecedent.

              Equations
              Instances For
                @[instance_reducible]
                instance AlonsoOvalle2009.instDecidableHorizonReaches {W : Type u_1} (w : W) [DecidableEq W] (f : W → Finset W) (φ : Finset W) :
                Decidable (HorizonReaches f φ w)
                Equations
                theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.horizonWould_anti {W : Type u_1} (w : W) [DecidableEq W] {f : W → Finset W} {φ φ' ψ : Finset W} (h : φ' ⊆ φ) (hw : horizonWould f φ ψ w) :
                horizonWould f φ' ψ w

                Strengthening the Antecedent and Simplification alike are Strawson valid (50), since on a horizon that already reaches the stronger antecedent, (45) is antitone in it.

                Simplification is dynamically invalid (47), since accommodating (48)'s antecedent from the initial horizon reaches the good-weather world only, so (49b) is undefined.

                Might counterfactuals (§3.2) #

                In (51) having a magic book is closer than being a newborn baby, and the fork is bent in one of the closest magic-book worlds and in no newborn world (Fig. 2).

                Instances For
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  Equations
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  @[reducible, inline]
                  Equations
                  Instances For
                    @[reducible, inline]
                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      Under (52)–(53) the closest worlds of the union are magic-book worlds, one of which bends the fork, so (51) is true; under the correlative analysis it is false, since (58a) is true but (58b) is not.

                      theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.strictMight_not_simplifying :
                      (∃ w ∈ hasBook ∪ newborn, w ∈ bent) ∧ ¬∃ w ∈ newborn, w ∈ bent

                      The strict dual might, with every world accessible, is true of the disjunction but not of the newborn disjunct, (57)–(58).

                      An implicature? (§4) #

                      Figures 3–4 have two worlds compatible with the speaker's beliefs; magic-book and newborn worlds are equally close to each, and the fork is bent in a closest magic-book world of the first and in a closest newborn world of the second.

                      Instances For
                        @[instance_reducible]
                        Equations
                        @[instance_reducible]
                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        @[reducible, inline]
                        Equations
                        Instances For

                          Manner (75)–(76) is satisfied — (73) holds throughout the belief state and neither (74a) nor (74b) does — yet the two simplifications hold together nowhere in it, so (77) is not predicted deviant.

                          The visibility of the disjuncts (§5.2) #

                          theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.distributive_pair_disjoint_iff {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] {A B : Finset W} (h : Disjoint A B) :
                          w ∈ Conditional.distributiveImp ord {A, B} ↑A ↔ B = ∅

                          On Nute's recipe (80), when the consequent is one of two incompatible disjuncts, the analysis makes the counterfactual true only if the other disjunct is impossible.

                          In (80) more defense spending is closer than more education spending.

                          Instances For
                            @[instance_reducible]
                            Equations
                            @[instance_reducible]
                            Equations
                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                            @[reducible, inline]
                            Equations
                            Instances For

                              (80) is a contradiction under the analysis and true once Existential Closure (82) returns the Boolean antecedent.

                              The paper's verdicts #

                              def AlonsoOvalle2009.cropAlts :
                              String → Option (Finset (Finset McKayVanInwagen1977.CropWorld))

                              The alternatives a row's antecedent feature names in each model.

                              Equations
                              Instances For
                                def AlonsoOvalle2009.forkAlts :
                                String → Option (Finset (Finset ForkWorld))
                                Equations
                                Instances For
                                  def AlonsoOvalle2009.verdict {W : Type u_1} (ord : W → Preorder W) (S : Finset (Finset W)) (C : Set W) (w : W) [DecidableEq W] [Fintype W] [(w : W) → DecidableRel LE.le] [DecidablePred fun (x : W) => x ∈ C] :
                                  String → Bool → Option Bool

                                  The verdict of the analysis for a would or might consequent, possibly negated.

                                  Equations
                                  Instances For
                                    def AlonsoOvalle2009.predicted (row : Datum) :
                                    Option Bool

                                    A row's predicted verdict from its scenario, antecedent, modal, and polarity features; (80) takes the Existential Closure reading (82).

                                    Equations
                                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                    Instances For
                                      theorem AlonsoOvalle2009.rows_agree (row : Datum) :
                                      row ∈ Examples.all → ∀ (v : String), row.feature? "verdict" = some v → ∀ (b : Bool), predicted row = some b → v = if b = true then "true" else "false"

                                      Every row with a stated verdict that the models cover carries the predicted one.