Inquisitive semantics¶
A semantic framework in which a sentence denotes a downward-closed set of information states, capturing both information conveyed and issues raised.
Core Idea¶
The framework has propositional, first-order and dynamic variants, alternatives are semantic objects rather than merely pragmatic answers and classical propositions form a special non-inquisitive case. Possible worlds form information states, support conditions evaluate sentences on states and downward closure plus maximal alternatives represent what information would resolve the sentence’s issue. The abstraction is therefore identified by a declared carrier, a transformation or constraint over that carrier, and an invariant that tells an analyst whether the named structure is genuinely present.
Scope of Application¶
Inquisitive semantics belongs to formal semantics and is useful where the analyst can specify the typed formal semantics carrier, including objects, relations, parameters, conventions, evidence, boundaries, and comparison targets, then evaluate the language and possible-world space, information states, support relation, downward-closed inquisitive propositions, alternatives and resolutions, informative and inquisitive content, semantics of statements questions and connectives and classical and pragmatic comparison are explicit. The scope is broad within that domain but bounded by the need for the language and possible-world space, information states, support relation, downward-closed inquisitive propositions, alternatives and resolutions, informative and inquisitive content, semantics of statements questions and connectives and classical and pragmatic comparison are explicit.
Clarity¶
The abstraction clarifies a crowded vocabulary by making the language and possible-world space, information states, support relation, downward-closed inquisitive propositions, alternatives and resolutions, informative and inquisitive content, semantics of statements questions and connectives and classical and pragmatic comparison are explicit the center of the account. A claim should name the carrier, the governing operation or relation, the applicable assumptions, and the recognition test.
Manages Complexity¶
Without the abstraction, an analyst must reason directly over many local details: the carrier roles, admissibility assumptions, competing conventions, derived invariants, boundary cases, and proof or validation obligations specific to Inquisitive semantics. Inquisitive semantics compresses them into the roles in the structural signature. That compression permits comparison across instances without erasing the variables that determine validity. It also exposes which details may be varied safely and which are constitutive.
Abstract Reasoning¶
- Identify the carrier. State what the elements, states, objects, or observations are: the typed formal semantics carrier, including objects, relations, parameters, conventions, evidence, boundaries, and comparison targets. Reject examples whose alleged carrier belongs to a different problem. 2. Lock the constitutive rule. Express the language and possible-world space, information states, support relation, downward-closed inquisitive propositions, alternatives and resolutions, informative and inquisitive content, semantics of statements questions and connectives and classical and pragmatic comparison are explicit independently of one notation or implementation.
Knowledge Transfer¶
Knowledge transfers strongly among subfields of formal semantics because they reuse the typed formal semantics carrier, including objects, relations, parameters, conventions, evidence, boundaries, and comparison targets, Possible worlds form information states, support conditions evaluate sentences on states and downward closure plus maximal alternatives represent what information would resolve the sentence’s issue., and type the carrier, state every parameter and convention in the definition, test that the language and possible-world space, information states, support relation, downward-closed inquisitive propositions, alternatives and resolutions, informative and inquisitive content, semantics of statements questions and connectives and classical and pragmatic comparison are explicit, compare the nearest accepted identity, and report counterexamples, uncertainty, and limiting cases.
Relationships to Other Abstractions¶
Current abstraction Inquisitive semantics Domain-specific
Parents (1) — more general patterns this builds on
-
Inquisitive semantics is a kind of Representation Prime
The proposed strict upward parent is
prime:representation.
Hierarchy path (1) — routes to 1 parentless root
- Inquisitive semantics → Representation → Abstraction
Neighborhood in Abstraction Space¶
Inquisitive semantics sits in a crowded region of the domain-specific corpus (3rd percentile for distinctiveness): several abstractions share nearly its structure, so a description that fits it tends to fit its neighbors too.
Family — Semantic Knowledge Representation (29 abstractions)
Nearest neighbors
- Veridicality — 0.95
- Proof-theoretic semantics — 0.94
- Semantic holism — 0.94
- Knowledge representation and reasoning — 0.93
- Quantificational variability effect — 0.93
Computed from structural-signature embeddings · 2026-09-08