Hand or Hammer? On Formal and Natural Languages in Semantics

Journal of Indian Philosophy 35 (5-6):597-626 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper does not deal with the topic of ‘the generosity of artificial languages from an Asian or a comparative perspective’. Rather, it is concerned with a particular case taken from a development in the Western tradition, when in the wake of the rise of formal logic at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century people in philosophy and later in linguistics started to use formal languages in the study of the semantics of natural languages. This undertaking rests on certain philosophical assumptions and instantiates a particular methodology, that we want to examine critically. However, that in itself is still too broad a topic for a single paper, so we will focus on a particular aspect, viz., the distinction between grammatical form and logical form and the crucial role it plays in how the relationship between natural languages and formal languages is understood in this tradition. We will uncover two basic assumptions that underlie the standard view on the distinction between grammatical form and logical form, and discuss how they have contributed to the shaping of a particular methodology and a particular view on the status of semantics as a discipline. But before we turn to the topic at hand, a few more words on the general nature of the investigation are in order. Its general aim is to find out how semantics constructs its object, i.e., we are interested in what semanticists view as the proper object of study, how they think this object can best be approached, and how they view the relations between their own undertaking and neighbouring disciplines that deal with related, or even the same kind of phenomena, such as cognitive psychology, cognitive neuroscience, philosophy, anthropology. The background assumption is that, much like in other disciplines, semantics, too, does not have its object of investigation cut out for itself by nature, but constructs it in a complex process that involves empirical elements (‘facts’ being already too dangerous a term), philosophical assumptions, and borrowings....

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

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

Hand or Hammer? On formal and natural languages in semantics.Martin Stokhof - 2007 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 35 (5-6):597-626.
The Role of Artificial Languages.Martin Stokhof - 2011 - In Gillian Russell & Delia Graff Fara (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Language. London: Routledge. pp. 5440553.
A Paradox for Possible World Semantics.Michael J. Shaffer & Jeremy Morris - 2006 - Logique Et Analyse 49 (195):307-317.
Brandom’s Incompatibility Semantics.Jaroslav Peregrin - 2008 - Philosophical Topics 36 (2):99-121.
Formal semantics in the age of pragmatics.Juan Barba - 2007 - Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (6):637-668.
Linguistic semantics.William Frawley - 1992 - Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Measuring and Modelling Truth.Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2012 - American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (4):345-356.
Semantics.David Beaver & Joey Frazee - forthcoming - The Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics 2nd Edition.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-22

Downloads
46 (#328,927)

6 months
7 (#339,156)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Martin Stokhof
University of Amsterdam

Citations of this work

A Constructionist Philosophy of Logic.Patrick Allo - 2017 - Minds and Machines 27 (3):545-564.
Montague semantics.Theo M. V. Janssen - forthcoming - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Natural Language and Logic of Agency.Johan van Benthem - 2014 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 23 (3):367-382.
Against Crude Semantic Realism.Florian Demont - 2009 - ILLC Technical Notes (X) Series.
Jigsaw Semantics.Paul J. E. Dekker - 2011 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6:1-26.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Tractatus logico-philosophicus.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1922 - Filosoficky Casopis 52:336-341.
Notebooks, 1914-1916.Ludwig Wittgenstein - 1961 - Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Edited by G. H. von Wright & G. E. M. Anscombe.
Meaning and grammar: an introduction to semantics.Gennaro Chierchia & Sally McConnell-Ginet - 2000 - Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Edited by Sally McConnell-Ginet.

View all 11 references / Add more references