Croatian Journal of Philosophy 20 (3):295-310 (2020)

Authors
Elmar Unnsteinsson
University College Dublin
Abstract
Paul Pietroski has developed a powerful minimalist and internalist alternative to standard compositional semantics, where meanings are identified with instructions to fetch or assemble human concepts in specific ways. In particular, there appears to be no need for Fregean Function Application, as natural language composition only involves processes of combining monadic or dyadic concepts, and Pietroski’s theory can then, allegedly, avoid both singular reference and truth conditions. He also has a negative agenda, purporting to show, roughly, that the vocabulary of standard truth conditional semantics is far too powerful to plausibly describe the linguistic competence of mere human minds. In this paper, I explain some of the basics of Pietroski’s compositional semantics and argue that his major objection to standard compositionality is inconclusive, because a similar argument can be mounted against his own minimalist theory. I argue that we need a clear distinction between the language of the theorist---theoretical notation---and the language whose nature we are trying to explain. The theoretical notation should in fact be as expressively powerful as possible. It does not follow that the notation cannot be used to explain mere human linguistic competence, even if human minds are limited in various ways.
Keywords Analytic Philosophy  Contemporary Philosophy
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Character of Natural Language Semantics.Paul M. Pietroski - 2003 - In Alex Barber (ed.), Epistemology of Language. Oxford University Press. pp. 217--256.
Minimal Semantic Instructions.Paul M. Pietroski - 2011 - In Boeckx Cedric (ed.), Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism. Oxford University Press. pp. 472-498.
Semantic Monadicity with Conceptual Polyadicity.Paul Pietroski - 2012 - In Wolfram Hinzen, Edouard Machery & Markus Werning (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Compositionality. Oxford University Press.
Conjoining Meanings Without Losing Our Heads.John Collins - 2020 - Mind and Language 35 (2):224-236.
The Many Faces of Semantic Compositionality.Antonio Zeno Rauti - 2000 - Dissertation, University of California, Riverside
Responses to Comments on Conjoining Meanings.Paul Pietroski - 2020 - Mind and Language 35 (2):266-273.
Causing Actions.Paul M. Pietroski - 2000 - Oxford University Press.
From Compositional to Systematic Semantics.Wlodek Zadrozny - 1994 - Linguistics and Philosophy 17 (4):329 - 342.
Pietroski and Rey on Ceteris Paribus Laws.Gerhard Schurz - 2001 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (2):359Ð370.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-01-05

Total views
35 ( #296,764 of 2,421,654 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
35 ( #23,686 of 2,421,654 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes