Language without Linguistics, or Badly Reinventing Oxford Ordinary Language Philosophy

Synthese 120 (2):193 - 211 (1999)
Abstract Though Mr. Lin purports to attack "Chomsky's view of language" and to defend the "common sense view of language", he in fact attacks "views" that are basic and common to linguists, psycholinguists, and developmental psychologists. Indeed, though he cites W. V. O. Quine, L. Wittgenstein, and J. L. Austin in his support, they all sharply part company from his views, Austin particularly. Lin's views are not common sense but a set of scholarly and philological prejudices that linguistics disparaged from its inception as an organized science a hundred years ago.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified (fix it)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,653
External links
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Gergo Somodi (2009). Ignorance Radicalized. Studia Philosophica Estonica 2:140-156.
    Ruth G. Millikan (2003). In Defense of Public Language. In Louise M. Antony & H. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics. Blackwell.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2011-05-29

    Total downloads

    6 ( #145,458 of 548,984 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #63,327 of 548,984 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums