Switch to: References

Citations of:

Language and the Measure of Mind

Mind and Language 25 (4):418-439 (2010)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Holism, Meaning Similarity and Inferential Space—a Measurement Theoretic Approach.Eli Dresner - 2019 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 48 (4):611-630.
    Proponents of meaning holism often invoke notions of meaning similarity and semantic spatiality in order to counter accusations that holism renders language unstable and chaotic. However, talk of such notions often falls short of being explicit and formal. In this paper I present an algebraically couched theory of inferential similarity and spatiality, motivated by measurement theory, and I apply it to the discussion of meaning holism. I argue that the proposed theory offers new and improved conceptual resources for facing the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Measurement‐Theoretic Accounts of Propositional Attitudes.Robert J. Matthews - 2011 - Philosophy Compass 6 (11):828-841.
    In the late 1970s and early 1980s a number of philosophers, notably Churchland, Field, Stalnaker, Dennett, and Davidson, began to argue that propositional attitude predicates are a species of measure predicate, analogous in important ways to numerical predicates by which we attribute physical magnitudes. Other philosophers, including myself, have subsequently developed the idea in greater detail. In this paper I sketch the general outlines of measurement‐theoretic accounts of propositional attitudes, explaining in the briefest terms the basic idea of such accounts, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Notational Variants and Invariance in Linguistics.Kent Johnson - 2015 - Mind and Language 30 (2):162-186.
    This article argues that the much-maligned ‘notational variants’ of a given formal linguistic theory play a role similar to alternative numerical measurement scales. Thus, they can be used to identify the invariant components of the grammar; i.e., those features that do not depend on the choice of empirically equivalent representation. Treating these elements as the ‘meaningful’ structure of language has numerous consequences for the philosophy of science and linguistics. I offer several such examples of how linguistic theorizing can profit from (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations