Erkenntnis 40 (2):213 - 225 (1994)

Abstract
Literal meaning is often identified with conventional meaning. In A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs Donald Davidson argues (1) that literal meaning is distinct from conventional meaning, and (2) that literal meaning is identical to what he calls first meaning. In this paper it is argued that Davidson has established (1) but not (2), that he has succeeded in showing that there is a distinction between literal meaning and conventional meaning but has failed to see that literal meaning and first meaning are also distinct. This failure is somewhat surprising, since it is through a consideration of Davidson's notion of radical interpretation that the distinction between literal meaning and first meaning becomes apparent.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF01128593
Options
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: 53,514
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

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.
What We Tend to Mean.Rani Lill Anjum & Stephen Mumford - 2011 - Norsk Filosofisk Tidsskrift 46 (1):20-33.
Is Literal Meaning Conventional?Andrei Marmor - 2008 - Topoi 27 (1-2):101-113.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
141 ( #64,640 of 2,348,202 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #510,741 of 2,348,202 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes