Lifting the church-ban on quotational analysis: The translation argument and the use-mention distinction [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal for General Philosophy of Science 32 (2):257-270 (2001)
According to quotational theory, indirect ascriptions of propositional attitudes should be analyzed as direct ascriptions of attitudes towards natural-language sentences specified by quotations. A famous objection to this theory is Church's translation argument. In the literature several objections to the translation argument have been raised, which in this paper are shown to be unsuccessful. This paper offers a new objection. We argue against Church's presupposition that quoted expressions, since they are mentioned, cannot be translated. In many contexts quoted expressions are used and mentioned simultaneously, and the quotational analysis of propositional-attitude ascriptions is such a context. Hence the translation argument is unsound.
|Keywords||translation argument use-mention distinction propositional-attitude ascriptions quotational theory quotation intensionality Carnap Church Davidson Dummett Martin Quine|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dr Ernst-August Gutt (1990). A Theoretical Account of Translation - Without a Translation Theory. Philosophical Explorations.
Barbara Abbott (2011). Attitudes Toward Quotation1. In Elke Brendel (ed.), Understanding Quotation. De Gruyter Mouton. 7--35.
Ori Simchen (1999). Quotational Mixing of Use and Mention. Philosophical Quarterly 50 (196):325-336.
Arnold Cusmariu (1983). Translation and Belief Again. Analysis 43 (1):23-25.
Roger Wertheimer (2008). The Paradox of Translation. In B. . Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk & M. Thelen (eds.), Translation and Meaning. Hogeschool Zuyd.
Arnold Cusmariu (1982). Translation and Belief. Analysis 42 (1):12-16.
George Bealer (1993). Universals. Journal of Philosophy 60 (1):5-32.
Christos Douskos (2013). The Linguistic Argument for Intellectualism. Synthese 190 (12):2325-2340.
Wolfgang Heydrich (1993). A Reconception of Meaning. Synthese 95 (1):77 - 94.
M. Dusche (1995). Interpreted Logical Forms as Objects of the Attitudes. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 4 (4):301-315.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads25 ( #73,966 of 1,101,833 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #306,516 of 1,101,833 )
How can I increase my downloads?