My research, at the interface of philosophy of language, semantics and pragmatics, has addressed four sets of issues:
(1) How does language encode logical relations? Are functional, as opposed to lexical, categories, the bearers of logicality in natural language?
(2) What is the best way to characterize the boundary between semantics and pragmatics?
(3) Does first-personal discourse display any peculiar features? Are ‘de se’ attitudes special, and to which extent?
(4) Are there dedicated linguistic constructions to express subjective evaluation? Is there a unified class of evaluative predicates, of which moral, aesthetic and taste predicates form subclasses? 

I have defended a novel conception of linguistic architecture, which makes room for a tripartite distinction between semantics, pragmatics, and what I call ‘prepragmatics’. I have argued that this novel conception explains better phenomena such as demonstrative reference, quantifier domain restriction, or the context-sensitivity of gradable adjectives.

​

My current research aims to explore the variety of linguistic mechanisms that underscore evaluative discourse. One direction of research concerns the classification of adjectives and aims to put forward a battery of linguistic criteria that tease apart subjectivity from evaluativity. Another direction studies the ways in which the valence evaluative judgments may depend on the context. Yet a third direction explores the semantics and pragmatics of expressive meaning, as when we use pejoratives, such as ’jerk’.

While my research focuses primarily on theoretical questions, I appeal to methodologies from experimental pragmatics as well as corpus linguistics. My work on evaluative discourse has a broader scope, reaching into metaethics and aesthetics, as well as the epistemology of disagreement.