Crazy people ranting about communists contaminating their precious bodily fluids. So, pretty much exactly what he was making fun of?
Back to Top Philosophy of Language is the reasoned inquiry into the origins of language, the nature of meaning, the usage and cognition of language, and the relationship between language and reality.
It overlaps to some extent with the study of EpistemologyLogicPhilosophy of Mind and other fields including linguistics and psychologyalthough for many Analytic Philosophers it is an important discipline in its own right.
It asks questions like "What is meaning? In the Western tradition, the early work was covered, as usual, by PlatoAristotle and the Stoics of Ancient Greece.
Plato generally considered that the names of things are determined by nature, with each phoneme the smallest structural unit that distinguishes meaning representing basic ideas or sentiments, and that convention only has a small part to play.
Aristotle held that the meaning of a predicate the way a subject is modified or described in a sentence is established through an abstraction of the similarities between various individual things a theory later known as Nominalism. His assumption that these similarities are constituted Sapir whorf thesis of language a real commonality of form, however, also makes him a proponent of Moderate Realism.
The Stoic philosophers made important contributions to the analysis of grammar, distinguishing five parts of speech: The Scholastics of the Medieval era were greatly interested in the subtleties of language and its usage, provoked to some extent by the necessity of translating Greek texts into Latin, with Peter AbelardWilliam of Ockham and John Duns Scotus meriting particular mention.
They considered Logic to be a "science of language", and anticipated many of the most interesting problems of modern Philosophy of Language, including the phenomena of vagueness and ambiguity, the doctrines of proper and improper suppositio the interpretation of a term in a specific contextand the study of categorematic and syncategorematic words and terms.
Linguists of the Renaissance period were particularly interested in the idea of a philosophical language or universal languagespurred on by the gradual discovery in the West of Chinese characters and Egyptian hieroglyphs.
For a time, in the 20th Century philosophical branches of Analytic Philosophy and Ordinary Language Philosophy circles, philosophy as a whole was understood to be purely a matter of Philosophy of Language. Linguistics is the field of study that asks questions like: What distinguishes one particular language from another e.
What is it that makes "English" English? What is the difference between Spanish and French? Linguists like Noam Chomsky -a figure who has come to define 20th Century linguistics, have emphasized the role of "grammar" and syntax the rules that govern the structure of sentences as a characteristic of any language.
Chomsky believes that humans are born with an innate understanding of what he calls "universal grammar" an innate set of linguistic principles shared by all humans and a child's exposure to a particular language just triggers this antecedent knowledge.
Chomsky begins with the study of people's internal language what he calls "I-languages"which are based upon certain rules which generate grammars, supported in part by the conviction that there is no clear, general and principled difference between one language and the next, and which may apply across the field of all languages.
Other attempts, which he dubs "E-languages", have tried to explain a language as usage within a specific speech community with a specific set of well-formed utterances in mind. Translation and interpretation present other problems to philosophers of language.
In the s, W. Quine argued for the indeterminacy of meaning and reference based on the principle of radical translation e.
He claimed that, in such a situation, it is impossible in principle to be absolutely certain of the meaning or reference that a speaker of the primitive tribe's language attaches to an utterance, and, since the references are indeterminate, there are many possible interpretations, no one of which is more correct than the others.
The resulting view is called Semantic Holism, a type of Holism which holds that meaning is not something that is associated with a single word or sentence, but can only be attributed to a whole language if at all.
Quine 's disciple, Donald Davidson -extended this argument further to the notion of radical interpretation, that the meaning that an individual ascribes to a sentence can only be determined by attributing meanings to many, perhaps all, of the individual's assertions as well as his mental states and attitudes.
Arguably, there are two essentially different types of linguistic meaning:Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Examples and Definition An example of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is how sexist language influences the way in which our society views men and women.
Sapir-Whorf. The hypothesis of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects its speakers' world view or srmvision.com known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, the principle is often defined to include two versions: the strong hypothesis and the weak hypothesis.
The strong version says that language determines thought and that linguistic categories limit and. Sapir-whorf hypothesis definition, a theory developed by Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf that states that the structure of a language determines or greatly influences the modes of thought and behavior characteristic of the culture in which it is spoken.
See more. Philosophy of language is the reasoned inquiry into the nature, origins, and usage of language. As a topic, the philosophy of language for Analytic Philosophers has been concerned with four central problems: the nature of meaning, language use, language cognition, and the relationship between.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the theory that an individual's thoughts and actions are determined by the language or languages that individual speaks. The strong version of the hypothesis states that all human thoughts and actions are bound by the restraints of language, and is generally less accepted than the weaker version, which says that.
For another, if the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis were really true, second language learning and translation would be far harder than they are. However, because language is so pervasive—and because we must always make cognitive decisions while speaking—weaker versions of the hypothesis will continue to attract scientific attention.