King’s Felicitous Underspecification (FU) is a rich, thought-provoking book, which draws on a wide range of novel and largely unappreciated linguistic examples to argue that we should take the idea of a felicitously underspecified use of context-sensitive language very seriously. If felicitous underspecification is as prevalent as King argues, understanding the mechanisms involved in its interpretation is crucial for our overall understanding of linguistic communication. FU further offers a sophisticated account of these mechanisms. In this piece, I critically examine some of the main themes in FU. In doing so, I raise some worries for the interpretive mechanisms King posits. Specifically, I pose some challenges for his intentionalist GCA meta-semantics, and raise worries about the central interpretive role he assigns to his proposed contextual update rule, FUU.

金的《恰当的未指定》（FU）是一本内容丰富、发人深省的书，它利用了大量新颖且基本上未被欣赏的语言学例子来论证我们应该非常认真地对待上下文相关语言的适当未指定的使用这一想法。如果恰当的不明确如金所说的那样普遍，那么理解其解释所涉及的机制对于我们对语言交流的整体理解至关重要。 FU 进一步对这些机制进行了复杂的解释。在这篇文章中，我批判性地审视了 FU 中的一些主题。在此过程中，我对金提出的解释机制提出了一些担忧。具体来说，我对他的意向主义 GCA 元语义提出了一些挑战，并对他分配给他提出的上下文更新规则 FUU 的核心解释角色表示担忧。