When we attempt to give a semantics for a natural language, what are we trying to do, and how might we best set about doing it? The present paper is devoted to reconsidering one influential answer to these questions - that due to Donald Davidson - and to arguing for a subtle, but far-reaching, revision to it. The revision will be motivated by considering the problem (in itself familiar) of bringing modal expressions within the compass of a semantical theory that conforms to his answer. Each of the three ways of dealing with this problem advanced by orthodox Davidsonians has, as I shall argue, unacceptable consequences. I propose a treatment of modal expressions which is available only if we make the recommended revision. I conclude by showing how the proposed treatment casts new light upon the relationship between necessity and apriority, and upon the concept of necessary truth itself.
['Ian Rumfitt']
Semantic Theory And Necessary Truth