Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 46 (2):148-159 (2011)
AbstractDavidson and Chomsky, though differing on much in the study of language, are united in the view that the traditional notion of a shared language, such as English or Norwegian, has no part to play in a scientific or philosophical understanding of linguistic competence and communication. Davidson accepts Chomsky's ideas about our linguistic ability as underpinned by dedicated and possibly hard-wired aspects of the mind/brain, but does not see this as relevant to a constitutive account of meaning and communication; Chomsky sees Davidson's philosophy of language, like all others based on semantic notions, as doomed to obscurity. Against this background I subject Davidson's argument from malapropisms for the view that there are no such things as languages to critical scrutiny. I conclude that it fails to show that communication does not rest on shared languages, but only that we speak a lot more such languages than we are ordinarily inclined to suppose. This consequence, of interest in its own right, also seems absurd. In the context of a Chomsky-Davidson debate, in which one is sceptical of the traditional concept of a language, this provides a corresponding lift for Chomsky's overall perspective on language and the study thereof.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Linguistic Epiphenomenalism ‐ Davidson and Chomsky on the Status of Public Languages.Isaac Nevo - 2010 - Journal of the Philosophy of History 4 (1):1-22.
Familiar Words in Unfamiliar Surroundings: Davidson’s Malapropisms, Cavell’s Projections.Martin Gustafsson - 2011 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19 (5):643 - 668.
Malapropisms and Davidson's Theories of Literal Meaning.John Michael McGuire - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:93-97.
Interpretation and Skill: On Passing Theory.David Simpson - 2003 - In G. Preyer, G. Peter & M. Ulkan (eds.), Concepts of Meaning: Framing an Integrated theory of Linguistic Behavior. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Is There Such a Thing as a Language? An Examination of Donald Davidson's "a Nice Derangement of Epitaphs".John Russell Cook - 2002 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)
Cosmopolitan Communication and the Broken Dream of a Common Language.Niclas Rönnström - 2011 - Educational Philosophy and Theory 43 (3):260-282.
Davidson's Derangement: Of the Conceptual Priority of Language.Karen Green - 2001 - Dialectica 55 (3):239-258.
Does Conversation Need Shared Language? Davidson and Gadamer on Communicative Understanding.Greg Lynch - 2014 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 52 (3):359-381.
Davidson on Sharing a Language and Correct Language-Use.Peter Baumann - 1996 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 52 (1):137-160.
In Defense of Public Language.Ruth G. Millikan - 2003 - In Louise M. Antony & H. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics. Blackwell.
Unconventional Utterances? Davidson’s Rejection of Conventions in Language Use.Mason Cash - 2004 - ProtoSociology 20:285-319.