Rule-following, compositionality and the normativity of meaning

In D. Prawitz (ed.), Meaning and Interpretation. Konferenser (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

However, if Wittgenstein’s so called rule-following considerations are correct, then this reason for believing in the validity of (C), is mistaken. The conclusion of those considerations is that we must reject the idea that rules are things which determine possible cases of application before those cases are actually encountered and decided by speakers. If this is right, then there is no rule which determines the meanings of new sentences, i.e. before those sentences have actually been used. Therefore, it might seem that (C) is not valid for natural languages.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
156 (#118,746)

6 months
8 (#347,798)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Pagin
Stockholm University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references