A Review of “Dynamics of Language: Philosophy of the World of the Words” (original) (raw)

Introduction to Essays in Philosophy, Volume 8, Number 1: Philosophy of Language

Essays in Philosophy, 2007

Wittgenstein’s shadow partly explains the extent to which the nine essays gathered in this volume,Essays in Philosophy diverse though they may be, overlap in their attention to trespass. Post-Wittgenstein, it is hardly possible to speak of philosophy or language without attending to silence as an assertion of those matters about which we cannot speak. The adumbration of silence, circling both that of which we do not speak and that of which we cannot, never quite satisfied that we know the difference, largely defines the language of philosophy. Essays in Philosophy, Vol. 8, No. 1, January 2007

An introduction to the philosophy of language

author's style is opaque. Crucial paragraphs require several readings and even then their meaning remains obscure. This said, the book will interest those thinking about the problem of theoretical terms. UNIVERSITY OF BRADFORD ROGER FELLOWS A n Introduction t o the Philosophy of Language.

Language and Extra-linguistic Reality in Bhartṛhari’s Vākyapadīya // Sophia (first online: 2018).

2018

Relation between language and extra-linguistic reality is an important problem of Bhartṛhari’s linguistic philosophy. In the ‘Vākyapadīya,’ this problem is discussed several times, but in accordance with the general perspectivist trend of Bhartṛhari’s philosophy each time it is framed through different concepts and different solutions are provided. In this essay, an attempt is undertaken to summarize the variety of different and mutually exclusive views on language and extra-linguistic reality in VP and to formulate the hidden presuppositions on which the actual viewpoints expressed in the kārikās are based. As a result, the following approaches are formulated: (A1) Language is coextensive with external reality. (A2a) Language, designated as kalpanā/vikalpa, is distinct from reality. (A2b) Language refers to the secondary/metaphorical reality (upacārasattā/aupacārikī sattā). (A3) Language and reality somehow correlate, because otherwise, practical/linguistic activity (vyavahāra) would be impossible. The origin of these approaches and their affinities with different schools of Indian philosophy (Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika and Buddhist Pramāṇavāda) are examined. Approach (A3), according to which correlation between language and reality is functional and not ontological, seems very close to Dharmakīrti’s concept of arthakriyā. This approach accords with Bhartṛhari’s perspectivist philosophical strategy. It enabled him to explain how effective linguistic activity is possible, capturing language in its dynamic aspect, without limitative static ontological constructions.

The Dynamics of Language

2006

Bouzouita (2001). As this array of jointly authored papers makes plain, it is almost an accident of history who turns out to be a listed author. In particular, we have to thank Wilfried Meyer-Viol for his influence on almost every page. A substantial part of chapters 2-3 overlaps with that of Kempson et al. (2001). And the discussion of quantification chapter 3, section 3 relies very heavily on chapter 7 of Kempson et al. (2001), which is largely his work. So our biggest vote of thanks goes to him. He cannot however be blamed for any of the analyses presented here, and he would certainly disavow the particular cognitive stance which we have adopted. So we thank him for the high standards of formal rigour he has demanded of all explanations articulated within the framework, and for the challenge of disagreeing with him almost every step of the way over the cognitive underpinnings of the system as set out. There are many other people over the years we have to thank, for their input, their support, even their disagreement, all of which have contributed to the further articulation of our ideas. These include, perhaps first and foremost our students, since they have had to bear the brunt of hearing our ideas as they have emerged, and so have contributed centrally to the way the framework has developed:

The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Language

Journal of Pragmatics, 2007

This is not just a voluminous tome but a splendid reference book which will help students and professional scholars alike find their way into philosophy of language, by choosing between alternative theories. Those who recall Strawson's reference to the Homeric battles between formal semanticists and proponents of less formal, communication-oriented paradigms will find it somehow surprising that both paradigms are represented in this book-surely an indication that the editors (who are closer to the formal paradigm) are pretty open-minded people. I heavily applaud this book and recognize that it has many merits, among which that of addressing the semantics/pragmatics debate in a number of articles. Surely compiling such a book must have involved enormous sacrifice and the editors must have been aware that, perhaps because of this book, philosophy of language will be on a better footing from now onwards. Nevertheless, I also want to make many critical remarks, hoping that they will contribute directly or indirectly to the debates in question. The book somehow challenges Partee's remark (personal communication to the editors) that no interesting work can be done in semantics without knowledge of syntax. I think Lepore and Smith show that there is much left for philosophy of language, such as, for example, the connection between philosophy of mind and philosophy of language. I personally find that while the articles in the handbook demonstrate that philosophy of language of a more classical type can still be done, students would have benefited from articles in which philosophy and syntax mix to give interesting accounts of certain philosophical notions. We are happy to read that, according to the editors, ''the philosophy of language now focuses on its primary concern: the nature of natural language and the extraordinary capacity of human beings to express and communicate their thoughts about the world and other subject-matters'' (p. viii). At least the authors from the outset refuse to embrace the point of view that language is solely an instrument of thought and accept that language is also an instrument of communication. They continue by saying that ''Philosophy of language continues to take seriously the special place language plays in our lives as an object and source of knowledge, as an interface between minds, and as an anchor between experience and reality'' (p. ix). Well I have no quarrel with this, except that it does not allow (at least by direct logical/semantic implication) that language serves to shape human personality and that education intended as a global speech act turns out to have strong effects on the way a person turns out to be. Does personality develop out of human linguistic interaction? And what are the effects of education and linguistic interaction on personality? Is the person a fixed entity or some kind of variable entity, a social, interactional construction? Can philosophers

Overcoming Word-Centrism: Towards a New Foundation for the Philosophy of Language

Overcoming Word-Centrism, 2020

This article attempts to rethink the understanding of language as a "set of words" that correspond to the "objects" of external reality, which is characteristic of Western philosophy and lay perception. The following arguments are offered against this approach: the concept of "word" (like the actual division into morphology and syntax) has no metalinguistic status; the classification of parts of speech is language-specific, so that the prototypical referential function of a "noun" cannot lay claim to the status of a universal linguistic function; and the idea of language as a "set of words" only reflects the specific metapragmatic awareness of speakers of European languages. Through examining the facts of linguistic diversity and linguistic functions in light of grammatical typology, the author shows that the most adequate interpretation of the relationship between language and reality is an understanding that characterizes language as a large-scale device for forcing its users towards a specific depiction of events. The author also emphasizes the fundamental specificity of the grammatical structure and usage models of each concrete linguistic system. In order to promote a philosophical understanding of language, it is necessary to move from a naïve model that operates with "word-reference-object" to a more realistic model involving "language (as a set of morphosyntactic patterns of conceptualization)-correspondence-event (as a complex situation involving meaning)."