Individuating beliefs: DP objects of attitude verbs and their domains of quantification

Abstract

Attitude predicates can take DP arguments that seem to quantify over propositions. But letting the DPs range over arbitrary propositions predicts incorrect truth conditions when combined with a standard possible-worlds semantics for attitude verbs. Here, I develop a new descriptive generalization characterizing the relevant propositions: Each set S of propositions the determiner combines with is restricted to those propositions that partially answer a question in a certain set, and are ‘minimal’ within S among the partial answers to that question. The set of questions is derived from the Hamblin sets of questions raised in the context. While this paper does not provide a full analysis, I argue that the effects of this generalization are not limited to attitude predicates, suggesting that it reflects a more general property of DP quantification.