Comment: Interjections and Expressivity

Emotion Review 6 (1):64-65 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Natural semantic metalanguage assumes that interjections’ meaning is principally conceptual. However, the expressive character of immediate interjections requires the rejection of any conceptualist approach to their meaning. When compared with vocabulary for which a conceptual account is most plausible, immediate uses of interjections appear to fail a basic requirement on the postulation of conceptual meaning.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,031

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
2014-01-20

Downloads
13 (#1,065,206)

6 months
1 (#1,516,001)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Author Reply.Cliff Goddard - 2014 - Emotion Review 6 (1):66-67.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong.Jerry A. Fodor - 1998 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Concepts and Cognitive Science.Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis - 1999 - In Eric Margolis & Stephen Laurence (eds.), Concepts: Core Readings. MIT Press. pp. 3-81.
Theories of lexical semantics.Dirk Geeraerts - 2010 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 6 references / Add more references