Philosophers who take maps to have a semantics (i.e., rules that assign contents to cartographic marks) also typically hold that semantics fully determines the truth‐conditional meaning of maps. In this paper, I tackle this form of literalism, which assigns no truth‐conditional role to pragmatics, by investigating the semantics‐pragmatics divide in cartographic representation. I rely on examples from Google Maps, whose widespread use makes it possible to draw general conclusions about the communicative behavior of maps. This behavior, I argue, supports a form of contextualism, on which pragmatics pervasively influences the truth conditions of maps by altering semantic elements.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francesco Pierini (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: