Synthese 120 (2):213-228 (1999)

It is unfortunate that Francis Y. Lin, in ‘Chomsky on the “ordinary language” view of language’ pays little attention to his own remark, ‘Chomsky’s criticisms make us realize that we should not be content with general and vague formulations of convention, ability, and so on. We must make such notions precise and provide details’ Lin speaks so imprecisely and provides so few details of notions on which he relies heavily, such as ‘general learning mechanism’ and ‘sentence frame’, that readers must employ large amounts of guesswork to place even a halfway specific interpretation on his proposals and claims.
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Epistemology   Logic   Metaphysics   Philosophy of Language
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1023/A:1005266531363
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 55,955
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ordinary Language in Memoriam.Herman Tennessen - 1965 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 8 (1-4):225 – 248.
In Defense of Public Language.Ruth G. Millikan - 2003 - In Louise M. Antony & H. Hornstein (eds.), Chomsky and His Critics. Blackwell.
Chomsky Amongst the Philosophers.Dunja Jutronić - 2005 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 5 (3):423-431.


Added to PP index

Total views
61 ( #161,824 of 2,403,169 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #552,147 of 2,403,169 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes