{"id":{"repo_id":"baylor","oai_identifier":"oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/12349"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/baylor/oai:baylor-ir.tdl.org:2104/12349","repository":{"repo_id":"baylor","name":"Baylor University","base_url":"https://baylor-ir.tdl.org/server/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"Reporting theory of fictionalizing.","abstract":"This is a dissertation in the philosophy of language. My main objective is to give the correct account of the speech act of fictionalizing, aka fiction-making or creating a fiction or storytelling, stipulating that this last excludes nonfiction stories and lies. The Introduction and Chapter Five work together to establish the exhaustiveness of the following trilemma of viable accounts of fictionalizing: David Lewis's and John Searle's pretend-assertion theory, Manuel Garcia-Carpintero's and Greg Currie's neo-Gricean audience-make-belief theory, and my reporting-on-fictional-situations theory. Chapter Four details an account of paradigmatic cases of reporting needed to understand my fictionalizing account, which is itself argued for in Chapter Five. Chapters Two and Three (with a smattering of Chapter Five) are meant to take pretense and make-belief theories out of the running altogether. Along the way readers will find contributions to discussions on assertion and other speech acts, pretense and other facsimile actions, the nature of propositions, fake news and misinformation, and even a potential resolution to a paradox related to tragic works of fiction, to name a few.","abstract_html":"This is a dissertation in the philosophy of language. My main objective is to give the correct account of the speech act of fictionalizing, aka fiction-making or creating a fiction or storytelling, stipulating that this last excludes nonfiction stories and lies. The Introduction and Chapter Five work together to establish the exhaustiveness of the following trilemma of viable accounts of fictionalizing: David Lewis's and John Searle's pretend-assertion theory, Manuel Garcia-Carpintero's and Greg Currie's neo-Gricean audience-make-belief theory, and my reporting-on-fictional-situations theory. Chapter Four details an account of paradigmatic cases of reporting needed to understand my fictionalizing account, which is itself argued for in Chapter Five. Chapters Two and Three (with a smattering of Chapter Five) are meant to take pretense and make-belief theories out of the running altogether. Along the way readers will find contributions to discussions on assertion and other speech acts, pretense and other facsimile actions, the nature of propositions, fake news and misinformation, and even a potential resolution to a paradox related to tragic works of fiction, to name a few.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Rosenbaum, John William, 1984-"],"institution":"Baylor University.","degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Pruss, Alexander R."],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2022,"date_issued":"2022-08","date_published":"2022-08","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:07:52Z","subjects":["Fiction.","Storytelling.","Fake news.","Language.","Literature.","Misinformation.","Misreporting.","Neo-Gricean.","Greg Currie.","David Lewis.","Ken Walton.","Manuel Garcia-Carpintero.","Alvin Plantinga.","John Searle.","Nature of propositions.","Paradox of tragedies.","Philosophy.","Speech act theory.","Reporting."],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12349","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Pruss, Alexander R."]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Rosenbaum, John William, 1984-"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2023-09-21T13:24:44Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2023-09-21T13:24:44Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["2022-08"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Thesis"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Baylor University."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Fiction.","Storytelling.","Fake news.","Language.","Literature.","Misinformation.","Misreporting.","Neo-Gricean.","Greg Currie.","David Lewis.","Ken Walton.","Manuel Garcia-Carpintero.","Alvin Plantinga.","John Searle.","Nature of propositions.","Paradox of tragedies.","Philosophy.","Speech act theory.","Reporting."]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12349"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This is a dissertation in the philosophy of language. My main objective is to give the correct account of the speech act of fictionalizing, aka fiction-making or creating a fiction or storytelling, stipulating that this last excludes nonfiction stories and lies. The Introduction and Chapter Five work together to establish the exhaustiveness of the following trilemma of viable accounts of fictionalizing: David Lewis's and John Searle's pretend-assertion theory, Manuel Garcia-Carpintero's and Greg Currie's neo-Gricean audience-make-belief theory, and my reporting-on-fictional-situations theory. Chapter Four details an account of paradigmatic cases of reporting needed to understand my fictionalizing account, which is itself argued for in Chapter Five. Chapters Two and Three (with a smattering of Chapter Five) are meant to take pretense and make-belief theories out of the running altogether. Along the way readers will find contributions to discussions on assertion and other speech acts, pretense and other facsimile actions, the nature of propositions, fake news and misinformation, and even a potential resolution to a paradox related to tragic works of fiction, to name a few."]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Reporting theory of fictionalizing."]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Pruss, Alexander R."],"dc:creator":["Rosenbaum, John William, 1984-"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2023-09-21T13:24:44Z"],"dc:date.available":["2023-09-21T13:24:44Z"],"dc:date.issued":["2022-08"],"dc:description.abstract":["This is a dissertation in the philosophy of language. My main objective is to give the correct account of the speech act of fictionalizing, aka fiction-making or creating a fiction or storytelling, stipulating that this last excludes nonfiction stories and lies. The Introduction and Chapter Five work together to establish the exhaustiveness of the following trilemma of viable accounts of fictionalizing: David Lewis's and John Searle's pretend-assertion theory, Manuel Garcia-Carpintero's and Greg Currie's neo-Gricean audience-make-belief theory, and my reporting-on-fictional-situations theory. Chapter Four details an account of paradigmatic cases of reporting needed to understand my fictionalizing account, which is itself argued for in Chapter Five. Chapters Two and Three (with a smattering of Chapter Five) are meant to take pretense and make-belief theories out of the running altogether. Along the way readers will find contributions to discussions on assertion and other speech acts, pretense and other facsimile actions, the nature of propositions, fake news and misinformation, and even a potential resolution to a paradox related to tragic works of fiction, to name a few."],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.uri":["https://hdl.handle.net/2104/12349"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:rights":["Baylor University works are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission. Contact libraryquestions@baylor.edu for inquiries about permission."],"dc:subject":["Fiction.","Storytelling.","Fake news.","Language.","Literature.","Misinformation.","Misreporting.","Neo-Gricean.","Greg Currie.","David Lewis.","Ken Walton.","Manuel Garcia-Carpintero.","Alvin Plantinga.","John Searle.","Nature of propositions.","Paradox of tragedies.","Philosophy.","Speech act theory.","Reporting."],"dc:title":["Reporting theory of fictionalizing."],"dc:type":["Thesis"],"thesis:degree_level":["Doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."],"thesis:institution_name":["Baylor University."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:07:52Z"}