Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Against Epistemic Absolutism.Changsheng Lai - forthcoming - Synthese:1-23.
    Epistemic absolutism is an orthodox view that propositional knowledge is an ungradable concept. Absolutism is primarily grounded in our ungradable uses of “knows” in ordinary language. This paper advances a thorough objection to the linguistic argument for absolutism. My objection consists of two parts. Firstly, arguments for absolutism provided by Jason Stanley and Julien Dutant will be refuted respectively. After that, two more general refutation-strategies will be proposed: counterevidence against absolutism can be found in both English and non-English languages; the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Revisited Linguistic Intuitions.Jennifer Culbertson & Steven Gross - 2011 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 62 (3):639 - 656.
    Michael Devitt ([2006a], [2006b]) argues that, insofar as linguists possess better theories about language than non-linguists, their linguistic intuitions are more reliable. (Culbertson and Gross [2009]) presented empirical evidence contrary to this claim. Devitt ([2010]) replies that, in part because we overemphasize the distinction between acceptability and grammaticality, we misunderstand linguists' claims, fall into inconsistency, and fail to see how our empirical results can be squared with his position. We reply in this note. Inter alia we argue that Devitt's focus (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Linguistic Intuitions Revisited.Michael Devitt - 2010 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 61 (4):833-865.
    Why are linguistic intuitions good evidence for a grammar? In 'Intuitions in Linguistics' ([2006a]) and Ignorance of Language ([2006b]), I looked critically at some Chomskian answers and proposed another one. In this article, I respond to Fitzgerald's 'Linguistic Intuitions' ([2010]), a sweeping critique of my position, and to Culbertson and Gross' 'Are Linguists Better Subjects?' ([2009]), a criticism of one consequence of the position. In rejecting these criticisms, I emphasize that the issue over linguistic intuitions concerns only metalinguistic ones. And (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Are Linguists Better Subjects?Jennifer Culbertson & Steven Gross - 2009 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):721-736.
    Who are the best subjects for judgment tasks intended to test grammatical hypotheses? Michael Devitt ( [2006a] , [2006b] ) argues, on the basis of a hypothesis concerning the psychology of such judgments, that linguists themselves are. We present empirical evidence suggesting that the relevant divide is not between linguists and non-linguists, but between subjects with and without minimally sufficient task-specific knowledge. In particular, we show that subjects with at least some minimal exposure to or knowledge of such tasks tend (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Whither Experimental Semantics?Michael Devitt - 2012 - Theoria : An International Journal for Theory, History and Fundations of Science 27 (1):5-36.
    The main goal of the paper is to propose a methodology for the theory of reference in which experiments feature prominently. These experiments should primarily test linguistic usage rather than the folk’s referential intuitions. The proposed methodology urges the use of: philosophers’ referential intuitions, both informally and, occasionally, scientifically gathered; the corpus, both informally and scientifically gathered; elicited production; and, occasionally,_ _ folk’s referential intuitions. The most novel part of this is and that is where most of the experimental work (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Intuitions in Linguistics.Michael Devitt - 2006 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (3):481-513.
    Linguists take the intuitive judgments of speakers to be good evidence for a grammar. Why? The Chomskian answer is that they are derived by a rational process from a representation of linguistic rules in the language faculty. The paper takes a different view. It argues for a naturalistic and non-Cartesian view of intuitions in general. They are empirical central-processor responses to phenomena differing from other such responses only in being immediate and fairly unreflective. Applying this to linguistic intuitions yields an (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  • Agent-Patient Similarity Affects Sentence Structure in Language Production: Evidence From Subject Omissions in Mandarin.Yaling Hsiao, Yannan Gao & Maryellen C. MacDonald - 2014 - Frontiers in Psychology 5.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Processing Reflexives and Pronouns in Picture Noun Phrase.Jeffrey T. Runner, Rachel S. Sussman & Michael K. Tanenhaus - 2006 - Cognitive Science 30 (2):193-241.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • The Representation and Processing of Coreference in Discourse.Peter C. Gordon & Randall Hendrick - 1998 - Cognitive Science 22 (4):389-424.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Structural and Semantic Constraints on the Resolution of Pronouns and Reflexives.Elsi Kaiser, Jeffrey T. Runner, Rachel S. Sussman & Michael K. Tanenhaus - 2009 - Cognition 112 (1):55-80.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • When is Cataphoric Reference Recognised?Ruth Filik & Anthony J. Sanford - 2008 - Cognition 107 (3):1112-1121.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Linguistic Judgments As Evidence.Steven Gross - forthcoming - In Nicholas Allott, Terje Lohndal & Georges Rey (eds.), Blackwell Companion to Chomsky. Wiley-Blackwell.
    An overview of debates surrounding the use of meta-linguistic judgments in linguistics, including recent relevant empirical results.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Optimization of Discourse Anaphora.David I. Beaver - 2004 - Linguistics and Philosophy 27 (1):3-56.
    In this paper the Centering model of anaphoraresolution and discourse coherence(Grosz et al. 1983, 1995)is reformulated in terms of Optimality Theory (OT)(Prince and Smolensky 1993). One version of the reformulated modelis proven to be descriptively equivalent to an earlier algorithmicstatement of Centering due to Brennan, Friedman and Pollard(1987). However, the new model is stated declaratively, and makesclearer the status of the various constraints used in the theory. Inthe second part of the paper, the model is extended, demonstratingthe advantages of the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Linguistic Intuitions: Error Signals and the Voice of Competence.Steven Gross - forthcoming - In Samuel Schindler, Anna Drożdżowicz & Karen Brøcker (eds.), Linguistic Intuitions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    Linguistic intuitions are a central source of evidence across a variety of linguistic domains. They have also long been a source of controversy. This chapter aims to illuminate the etiology and evidential status of at least some linguistic intuitions by relating them to error signals of the sort posited by accounts of on-line monitoring of speech production and comprehension. The suggestion is framed as a novel reply to Michael Devitt’s claim that linguistic intuitions are theory-laden “central systems” responses, rather than (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Linguistic Intuitions and Cognitive Penetrability.Michael Devitt - 2014 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 9.
    Metalinguistic intuitions play a very large evidential role in both linguistics and philosophy. Linguists think that these intuitions are products of underlying linguistic competence. I call this view “the voice of competence”. Although many philosophers seem to think that metalinguistic intuitions are a priori many may implicitly hold the more scientifically respectable VoC. According to VoC, I argue, these intuitions can be cognitively penetrated by the central processor. But, I have argued elsewhere, VoC is false. Instead, we should hold “the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Lexical Access in the Production of Pronouns.Bernadette M. Schmitt, Antje S. Meyer & Willem J. M. Levelt - 1999 - Cognition 69 (3):313-335.
  • Constraining the Comprehension of Pronominal Expressions in Chinese.Chin Lung Yang, Peter C. Gordon, Randall Hendrick & Chih Wei Hue - 2003 - Cognition 86 (3):283-315.
  • Philosophers and Grammarians.Jens Kipper - 2010 - Philosophical Psychology 23 (4):511-527.
    In the essay, I compare the aims and especially the methods of philosophers and grammarians. It transpires that there are several interesting similarities to be found with the method and aim in particular of traditional 'armchair philosophers'. I argue that these similarities go far enough to suggest that if armchair philosophers' method is in a state of challenge, as is claimed by a number of experimental philosophers, then the same can be said about the method of grammarians. However, I also (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Processing Domain of Dcope Interaction.Oliver Bott & Fabian Schlotterbeck - 2015 - Journal of Semantics 32 (1):fft015.
    The present study investigates whether quantifier scope is computed incrementally during online sentence processing. We exploited the free word order in German to manipulate whether the verbal predicate preceded or followed the second quantifier in doubly quantified sentences that required the computation of inverse scope. A possessive pronoun in the first quantifier that had to be bound by the second quantifier was used to enforce scope inversion. We tested whether scope inversion causes difficulty and whether this difficulty emerges even at (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations