Hey there. I was going to post something linguistics-related but not really related to my work; and then tonight I started staring at something in a published paper—in two papers, actually, since Paper B picks it up from Paper A—and suddenly realized it doesn't work. Huge empirical flaw. Like, drive-a-truck-through, wrong-truth-conditions flaw. And I have read and reread and rereread these papers for nearly five years without noticing before, which makes me wonder how I missed it, and how the authors missed it, and the reviewers, and the editors of the respective journals (Journal of Semantics and Linguistics & Philosophy—not journals known for their lack of attention to detail). And therefore makes me think I'm misanalyzing this now.
So. I'm likely to send email to a few people, but in the meantime and just in case: are there any (semi-)professional semanticists reading this, who'd be willing to check my math here?
Welcome to the new LiveJournal
Some changes have been made to LiveJournal, and we hope you enjoy them! As we continue to improve the site on a daily basis to make your experience here better and faster, we would greatly appreciate your feedback about these changes. Please let us know what we can do for you!