Not Strictly a Woman—QUD-Based Four-Valent Reasoning Discharges Lexical Meaning

We offer a framework that captures both context-dependency and vagueness of predicate meanings—illustrated by the politically relevant case of woman—as an interaction of lexical meaning and Question under Discussion (‘QUD’). We extend existing approaches to non-maximality to superficially polysemous predicates like woman and show that this is conceptually coherent and insightful for a linguistic analysis of political debates about gender invitation policies: while there are (i) clear, semantically true, and (ii) strictly unacceptable cases of x is a woman, there are also (iii) merely pragmatically acceptable cases (‘like a woman with respect to the QUD’) as well as (iv) truly vague ones. We argue that this four-way division is the least complex model that captures current gender discourses in a harm-reducing, trans-inclusive way. This offers a new perspective on the semantics–pragmatics interface of predicate meanings.