The Role of Artificial Languages

In Gillian Russell & Delia Graff Fara (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Language. London: Routledge. pp. 5440553 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

When one looks into the role of artificial languages in philosophy of language it seems appropriate to start with making a distinction between philosophy of language proper and formal semantics of natural language. Although the distinction between the two disciplines may not always be easy to make since there arguably exist substantial historical and systematic relationships between the two, it nevertheless pays to keep the two apart, at least initially, since the motivation commonly given for the use of artificial languages in philosophy of language is often rather different from the one that drives the use of such languages in semantics. Of course, this difference in motivation should not blind us for the commonalities that exists between the two disciplines. Philosophy of language and formal semantics have a common history, and arguably also share some of their substance. Philosophy of language is by and large an outgrowth of work in the analytical tradition in philosophy in the first half of the twentieth century. Both ordinary language philosophy, with its emphasis on the description of actual language use, as well as the more logic-oriented and formally inclined school of logical positivism contributed to the definition of philosophy of language as a separate philosophical discipline, with its own set of problems and methods to solve them. Another major contributor to the establishment of philosophy of language as a distinct discipline has been modern linguistics, in particular generative grammar in the tradition of Chomsky that became the dominant paradigm in linguisticsin the fifties and sixties of the previous century. And as it happens, both the generative tradition of Chomsky and analytic philosophy in its formal and less formal guises have been important factors in the development of formal semantics as well. Thus, it should come as no surprise that the two have something in common. That the communalities go beyond a common ancestry, but are reflected in substance and methods as well, will be argued later on. However, be that as it may, it is still a good idea to keep philosophy of language and formal semantics separate, at least initially, since the role that is assigned to artificial languages and the ways in which these languages are employed in both does differ in a number of respects that are worth keeping in mind..

Links

PhilArchive

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.
Hand or Hammer? On Formal and Natural Languages in Semantics.Martin Stokhof - 2007 - Journal of Indian Philosophy 35 (5-6):597-626.
Foundations of intensional semantics.Chris Fox - 2005 - Malden MA: Blackwell. Edited by Shalom Lappin.
Brandom’s Incompatibility Semantics.Jaroslav Peregrin - 2008 - Philosophical Topics 36 (2):99-121.
Quantifiers in Language and Logic.Stanley Peters & Dag Westerståhl - 2006 - Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Philosophy of Languages and Languages as Framework of Philosophies.Pablo Lopez Lopez - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 39:137-141.
Leibniz on the Improvement of Language and Understanding.Hans Poser - 2000 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 7:17-34.
Programming Languages as Technical Artifacts.Raymond Turner - 2014 - Philosophy and Technology 27 (3):377-397.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-22

Downloads
141 (#128,555)

6 months
59 (#72,289)

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.
A Computational Learning Semantics for Inductive Empirical Knowledge.Kevin T. Kelly - 2014 - In Alexandru Baltag & Sonja Smets (eds.), Johan van Benthem on Logic and Information Dynamics. Springer International Publishing. pp. 289-337.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references