In defense of public languages

Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (5):479-488 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

My modest aim in this note is to sketch three interrelated critiques of public languages, and to respond to them. All are broadly Chomskyan, and all support the same conclusion: that, insofar as they even exist, the study of public languages is not a viable scientific project. (Related critiques of semantics, understood as involving word–world relations, will be touched on as well)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,592

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-02-19

Downloads
126 (#143,186)

6 months
12 (#208,422)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Stainton
Western University

Citations of this work

A Deranged Argument Against Public Languages.Robert J. Stainton - 2016 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 59 (1):6-32.
Idiolects.Alex Barber - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use.Noam Chomsky - 1986 - Prager. Edited by Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel.
New horizons in the study of language and mind.Noam Chomsky - 2000 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Languages and language.David K. Lewis - 2010 - In Darragh Byrne & Max Kölbel (eds.), Arguing about language. New York: Routledge. pp. 3-35.
Semantics And Cognition.Ray S. Jackendoff - 1983 - Cambridge: MIT Press.

View all 24 references / Add more references