Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.Generics.Studies.Kirkpatrick2024

@cite{kirkpatrick-2024}: The Dynamics of Generics #

James Ravi Kirkpatrick, "The Dynamics of Generics." Journal of Semantics 40(4), 2024. 523–548.

Core Contribution #

Explains the asymmetry between generic Sobel sequences and their reverses using a dynamic semantic theory where generics expand a "modal horizon."

Existing static theories (Cohen's probabilistic account, @cite{cohen-1999a}; Greenberg's normality-based account; Sterken's indexical approach) assign equivalent truth conditions to both orders and cannot explain the asymmetry.

The key mechanism is that generics expand the set of salient individuals (the modal horizon) as a side effect of assertion. The first generic in a discourse excludes exceptional individuals from the horizon; subsequent generics are evaluated against the expanded horizon. Reversing the order makes exceptional individuals salient before the general claim is assessed.

Key predictions (verified below) #

  1. Generic Sobel sequences are consistent (sobel_consistent)
  2. Reverse generic Sobel sequences are inconsistent (reverse_sobel_inconsistent)
  3. Mixed generic sequences with non-overlapping contextual variables are consistent (mixed_consistent)

Connection to other Generics studies #

Three entities: two normal ravens and one albino raven.

Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      Normal ravens for the "raven" restrictor class: the non-albino ones. These are the output of NormalityOrder.optimal applied to ravens.

      Equations
      Instances For

        Normal albino ravens: all albino ravens are "normal" for their subkind. (Albino is not abnormal qua albino raven — it's abnormal qua raven.)

        Equations
        Instances For

          "Ravens are black"

          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For

            "Albino ravens aren't black"

            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Two entities: a male lion and a female lion.

              Instances For
                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  "Lions have manes" — restrictor incorporates Kirkpatrick's contextual variable C = alternatives to having a mane (sexually-selected traits). Only male lions are in the domain of "mane alternatives."

                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                  Instances For

                    "Lions give birth to live young" — restrictor incorporates C = alternatives to giving birth (modes of reproduction). Only female lions are in the domain of "reproduction alternatives."

                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For

                      Mixed sequence: both generics use different contextual variables C, so the first generic's salient individuals don't satisfy the second generic's restrictor. No mutual interference.

                      Equations
                      Instances For

                        Mixed generic sequences are consistent: the two generics don't interfere because they have non-overlapping restrictors (different contextual variables C).

                        The reverse mixed sequence is also consistent — mixed sequences are symmetric because the restrictors don't overlap.

                        The raven Sobel pair satisfies the general consistency theorem. This derives sobel_consistent from the paper's general argument (§5.1) rather than finite model checking.

                        The raven reverse Sobel pair satisfies the general inconsistency theorem. This derives reverse_sobel_inconsistent from the general argument (§5.2).

                        Example (4): "Teachers care for their students; but bad teachers don't." Another Sobel pair demonstrating the generality of the phenomenon.

                        Instances For
                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For
                            Equations
                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                            Instances For
                              Equations
                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                              Instances For

                                In discourse-initial position, Kirkpatrick's dynamic semantics reduces to static truth conditions. Both "Ravens are black" and "Albino ravens aren't black" are true when evaluated against an empty horizon — matching the predictions of static GEN.

                                The dynamic theory diverges from statics only in multi-sentence discourse, where prior generics have expanded the horizon.

                                The static-dynamic bridge instantiated for the raven model: discourse-initial evaluation of "Ravens are black" equals the static truth condition (all normal ravens satisfy the scope).

                                Forward Sobel: the raven model instantiates the structural horizon theorem. Both expansions fire — normal ravens first, then the albino raven.

                                Reverse Sobel: the general's expansion is blocked because the albino raven (made salient by the first generic) satisfies the "is a raven" restrictor. The final horizon contains only [albino].

                                The raven generic is idempotent: processing "Ravens are black" twice against any horizon gives the same result as processing it once. This instantiates the general horizonStep_idempotent.

                                The structural horizon theorems above explain WHY the asymmetry arises: the subset relation between restrictors (albino raven ⊆ raven) creates asymmetric blocking in horizon evolution. The abstract impossibility theorem (commutative_implies_equal_verdicts in Generics.lean) then rules out ANY commutative framework — including @cite{veltman-1996}'s normallyUpdate — from modeling this asymmetry.

                                @cite{veltman-1996}'s normallyUpdate is commutative (normallyUpdate_comm in UpdateSemantics/Default.lean), meaning that processing "normally (ravens are black)" then "normally (albino ravens aren't black)" produces the same expectation state as the reverse order. Since the state is identical, any consistency test must give the same verdict for both orders — predicting the reverse Sobel is also felicitous, contrary to empirical judgment.

                                The full raven domain.

                                Equations
                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                Instances For

                                  Normality ordering on ravens: normal ravens are equally normal; the albino raven is less normal than both. This encodes the normality intuition that @cite{kirkpatrick-2024}'s theory relies on: normal-colored ravens are the "default" for raven-kind.

                                  ravenNormality e₁ e₂ = true means e₁ is at least as normal as e₂.

                                  Equations
                                  Instances For

                                    The stipulated normalRavens are exactly the optimal ravens under ravenNormality. This grounds the raven model: the normal instances are derived from a normality ordering, not ad hoc.

                                    The stipulated normalAlbinoRavens are the optimal albino ravens. Within the albino-restricted domain, the albino raven is trivially optimal (it's the only member).

                                    fromPredicate constructs the same generic sentence as the hand-stipulated ravensAreBlack, grounding normalInstances via a binary normalcy predicate rather than a normality ordering.

                                    fromPredicate and fromOrder agree on the raven model: both constructors derive the same normal instances from their respective primitives.

                                    This demonstrates that binary normalcy (traditional GEN) and normality orderings (Kirkpatrick/Greenberg) coincide when the ordering has exactly two equivalence classes.

                                    @cite{kirkpatrick-2024} §3 argues that static theories — @cite{cohen-1999a}'s probabilistic account, @cite{greenberg-2003}'s normality-based account, @cite{sterken-2015}'s indexical approach — all fail to predict the Sobel asymmetry. The formal reason: static theories evaluate each generic independently (no state threading), so the conjunction of truth values is commutative. If both generics are independently true, both orders yield true ∧ true = true.

                                    This is a special case of commutative_implies_equal_verdicts from Generics.lean: any evaluation where each generic's truth value is determined independently of discourse position is trivially commutative.

                                    theorem Phenomena.Generics.Studies.Kirkpatrick2024.static_order_irrelevant {α : Type} (truth : αBool) (g₁ g₂ : α) :
                                    (truth g₁ && truth g₂) = (truth g₂ && truth g₁)

                                    Any state-independent evaluation assigns the same conjunction truth value regardless of presentation order.

                                    Both raven generics are true when evaluated discourse-initially (= statically), yet the dynamic theory distinguishes the orders.

                                    Static theories predict true ∧ true for both orders and therefore cannot model the asymmetry that @cite{kirkpatrick-2024}'s dynamic theory captures via horizon expansion and blocking.