Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 165 (3):957-973 (2013)
|Abstract||According to semantic minimalism, context-invariant minimal semantic propositions play an essential role in linguistic communication. This claim is key to minimalists’ argument against semantic contextualism: if there were no such minimal semantic propositions, and semantic content varied widely with shifts in context, then it would be “miraculous” if communication were ever to occur. This paper offers a critical examination of the minimalist account of communication, focusing on a series of examples where communication occurs without a minimal semantic proposition shared between speaker and hearer. The only way for minimalists to respond to these examples is by restricting the scope of their account to intra-lingual communication. It can then be shown (1) that the minimalist’s notion of a language shrinks to a point, such that practically no instances of communication will fall under that account, and (2) that the retreat to intra-lingual communication is in any case self-defeating, since the only way for minimalists to account for the individuation of languages is by resort to precisely the kinds of contextual considerations they abjured in the first place. In short, if, as minimalists allege, contextualism founders because it renders communication contingent on speaker and hearer sharing a context, it can now be seen that minimalism faces a parallel problem because it renders communication contingent on speaker and hearer sharing a language. I end by arguing that the possibility of communication cannot, as minimalists assume, be grounded in shared semantic conventions; rather, successful communication must precede the establishment of any particular set of semantic conventions|
|Keywords||Semantic minimalism Semantic contextualism Communication Language Semantic conventions|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
John MacFarlane (2007). Semantic Minimalism and Nonindexical Contextualism. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism: New Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Kent Bach (2006). The Excluded Middle: Semantic Minimalism Without Minimal Propositions. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 73 (2):435–442.
Sarah-Jane Leslie (2007). Moderately Sensitive Semantics. In G. Preyer (ed.), Context Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism.
Philip Robbins (2008). Minimalism and Modularity. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism.
Herman Cappelen & Ernest Lepore (2004). A Tall Tale: In Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34 (Supplement):3-28.
Herman Cappelen & Ernie Lepore (2005). A Tall Tale : In Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Contextualism in Philosophy: Knowledge, Meaning, and Truth. Oxford University Press.
Emma Borg (2009). Must a Semantic Minimalist Be a Semantic Internalist? Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 83 (1):31-51.
Ernest Lepore (2004). A Tall Tale. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 34 (Supplement):3-28.
Jakub Mácha (2012). The Idea of Code in Contextualism and Minimalism. Organon F 19 (suppl. 1):116-136.
Herman Cappelen (2007). Semantics and Pragmatics: Some Central Issues. In Gerhard Preyer & Georg Peter (eds.), Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism: New Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2012-08-08
Total downloads30 ( #46,469 of 739,519 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,288 of 739,519 )
How can I increase my downloads?