Linguistics and Philosophy 34 (5):479-488 (2011)

Robert Stainton
Western University
My modest aim in this note is to sketch three interrelated critiques of public languages, and to respond to them. All are broadly Chomskyan, and all support the same conclusion: that, insofar as they even exist, the study of public languages is not a viable scientific project. (Related critiques of semantics, understood as involving word–world relations, will be touched on as well)
Keywords Philosophy of linguistics  Metaphysics  Philosophy of science  Linguistic methodology
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10988-011-9104-7
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: 53,548
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Language as a Natural Object.Noam Chomsky - 2000 - In New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 106--133.

View all 22 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A Deranged Argument Against Public Languages.Robert J. Stainton - 2016 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 59 (1):6-32.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
96 ( #98,542 of 2,348,314 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #186,050 of 2,348,314 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes