Thomas Hodgson @twsh@scholar.social

And here:
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2009.00229.x

Pagin and Westerståhl discuss Pagin's argument.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-9991.2009.00228.x

Pagin's 'Communication and Strong Compositionality' is about this.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024258529030

I have been thinking about a question that I would have expected to have been discussed, but I haven't come across much.

We are told that a theory of meaning for a language is important because it illuminates the question of how speakers can encounter a novel sentence and work out what it means.

Textbooks in semantics often start with this motivation. I have taught the topic this way too.

What about the task for the speaker of selecting the right sentence?

#philosophy

I'm thinking of academic books, in particular.

I have read reviews where the author of the review thanks the author of the reviewed book. That suggests to me that the review as shared with the author before it was submitted.

Is that common practice? Should I do it?

I have a paper where I provide a new argument for a view. When I presented the paper, I often got questions which were objections to the view itself, not the specific new argument. I got some of that in a referee report too. I then added a section to the paper where I address all these objections. But now the paper is too long. I'm thinking about just removing that section. But I think that I will then get some or all of the objections from the next referees.

The first thing I noticed is that gedit colours markdown better.

I'm going to review Stefano Predelli's 'Fictional Discourse' some time in the next few months.
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/fictional-discourse-9780198854128?cc=gb&lang=en&

#reading for work:
'Imagination and Convention' by Ernie Lepore and Matthew Stone
https://global.oup.com/academic/product/imagination-and-convention-9780198797418?lang=en&cc=gb

for fun:
'Wolf Hall' by Hilary Mantel
https://www.worldcat.org/title/wolf-hall/oclc/911199501

What about cases where someone is sometimes published with a shortened version of their name? E.g., 'Tom' for 'Thomas'.

I try to be very careful about that myself, and always have my full name on programmes and publications even though lots of people call me by the short version.

If somebody sometimes publishes with their middle initial and sometimes without, can I add it to the papers without to make my bibliography neater, and to make it clear that there is just one person?

I wish that journals would tell me the decisions for papers I referee, and when they are published.