Philosophy of Linguistics. Scholz, B. C., Pelletier, F. J., & Pullum, G. K. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Winter 2016 edition, 2016. ![Philosophy of Linguistics [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper abstract bibtex Philosophy of linguistics is the philosophy of science as applied to linguistics. This differentiates it sharply from the philosophy of language, traditionally concerned with matters of meaning and reference., As with the philosophy of other special sciences, there are general topics relating to matters like methodology and explanation (e.g., the status of statistical explanations in psychology and sociology, or the physics-chemistry relation in philosophy of chemistry), and more specific philosophical issues that come up in the special science at issue (simultaneity for philosophy of physics; individuation of species and ecosystems for the philosophy of biology). General topics of the first type in the philosophy of linguistics include:, Specific topics include issues in language learnability, language change, the competence-performance distinction, and the expressive power of linguistic theories., There are also topics that fall on the borderline between philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics: of “linguistic relativity” (see the supplement on the linguistic relativity hypothesis in the Summer 2015 archived version of the entry on relativism), language vs. idiolect, speech acts (including the distinction between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts), the language of thought, implicature, and the semantics of mental states (see the entries on analysis, semantic compositionality, mental representation, pragmatics, and defaults in semantics and pragmatics). In these cases it is often the kind of answer given and not the inherent nature of the topic itself that determines the classification. Topics that we consider to be more in the philosophy of language than the philosophy of linguistics include intensional contexts, direct reference, and empty names (see the entries on propositional attitude reports, intensional logic, rigid designators, reference, and descriptions). , This entry does not aim to provide a general introduction to linguistics for philosophers; readers seeking that should consult a suitable textbook such as Akmajian et al. (2010) or Napoli (1996). For a general history of Western linguistic thought, including recenttheoretical linguistics, see Seuren (1998). Newmeyer (1986) is usefuladditional reading for post-1950 American linguistics. Tomalin (2006) traces the philosophical, scientific, and linguistic antecedents of Chomsky's magnum opus (1955/1956; published1975), and Scholz and Pullum (2007) provide a critical review.
@incollection{scholz_philosophy_2016,
edition = {Winter 2016},
title = {Philosophy of {Linguistics}},
url = {https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/linguistics/},
abstract = {Philosophy of linguistics is the philosophy of science as applied to linguistics. This differentiates it sharply from the philosophy of language, traditionally concerned with matters of meaning and reference., As with the philosophy of other special sciences, there are general topics relating to matters like methodology and explanation (e.g., the status of statistical explanations in psychology and sociology, or the physics-chemistry relation in philosophy of chemistry), and more specific philosophical issues that come up in the special science at issue (simultaneity for philosophy of physics; individuation of species and ecosystems for the philosophy of biology). General topics of the first type in the philosophy of linguistics include:, Specific topics include issues in language learnability, language change, the competence-performance distinction, and the expressive power of linguistic theories., There are also topics that fall on the borderline between philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics: of “linguistic relativity” (see the supplement on the linguistic relativity hypothesis in the Summer 2015 archived version of the entry on relativism), language vs. idiolect, speech acts (including the distinction between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts), the language of thought, implicature, and the semantics of mental states (see the entries on analysis, semantic compositionality, mental representation, pragmatics, and defaults in semantics and pragmatics). In these cases it is often the kind of answer given and not the inherent nature of the topic itself that determines the classification. Topics that we consider to be more in the philosophy of language than the philosophy of linguistics include intensional contexts, direct reference, and empty names (see the entries on propositional attitude reports, intensional logic, rigid designators, reference, and descriptions). , This entry does not aim to provide a general introduction to linguistics for philosophers; readers seeking that should consult a suitable textbook such as Akmajian et al. (2010) or Napoli (1996). For a general history of Western linguistic thought, including recenttheoretical linguistics, see Seuren (1998). Newmeyer (1986) is usefuladditional reading for post-1950 American linguistics. Tomalin (2006) traces the philosophical, scientific, and linguistic antecedents of Chomsky's magnum opus (1955/1956; published1975), and Scholz and Pullum (2007) provide a critical review.},
urldate = {2017-04-01},
booktitle = {The {Stanford} {Encyclopedia} of {Philosophy}},
publisher = {Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University},
author = {Scholz, Barbara C. and Pelletier, Francis Jeffry and Pullum, Geoffrey K.},
editor = {Zalta, Edward N.},
year = {2016},
keywords = {analysis, assertion, compositionality, defaults in semantics and pragmatics, descriptions, empiricism: logical, idiolects, innate/acquired distinction, innateness: and language, language of thought hypothesis, linguistics: computational, logic: intensional, mental representation, pragmatics, propositional attitude reports, reference, relativism, rigid designators},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"wcJGqnvSLysLtGZ3i","bibbaseid":"scholz-pelletier-pullum-philosophyoflinguistics-2016","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2017-04-01T11:49:38.682Z","title":"Philosophy of Linguistics","author_short":["Scholz, B. C.","Pelletier, F. J.","Pullum, G. K."],"year":2016,"bibtype":"incollection","biburl":"https://api.zotero.org/groups/1152176/items?key=bi2Q7duoPuqjf6lgym4TgM83&format=bibtex&limit=100","bibdata":{"bibtype":"incollection","type":"incollection","edition":"Winter 2016","title":"Philosophy of Linguistics","url":"https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/linguistics/","abstract":"Philosophy of linguistics is the philosophy of science as applied to linguistics. This differentiates it sharply from the philosophy of language, traditionally concerned with matters of meaning and reference., As with the philosophy of other special sciences, there are general topics relating to matters like methodology and explanation (e.g., the status of statistical explanations in psychology and sociology, or the physics-chemistry relation in philosophy of chemistry), and more specific philosophical issues that come up in the special science at issue (simultaneity for philosophy of physics; individuation of species and ecosystems for the philosophy of biology). General topics of the first type in the philosophy of linguistics include:, Specific topics include issues in language learnability, language change, the competence-performance distinction, and the expressive power of linguistic theories., There are also topics that fall on the borderline between philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics: of “linguistic relativity” (see the supplement on the linguistic relativity hypothesis in the Summer 2015 archived version of the entry on relativism), language vs. idiolect, speech acts (including the distinction between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts), the language of thought, implicature, and the semantics of mental states (see the entries on analysis, semantic compositionality, mental representation, pragmatics, and defaults in semantics and pragmatics). In these cases it is often the kind of answer given and not the inherent nature of the topic itself that determines the classification. Topics that we consider to be more in the philosophy of language than the philosophy of linguistics include intensional contexts, direct reference, and empty names (see the entries on propositional attitude reports, intensional logic, rigid designators, reference, and descriptions). , This entry does not aim to provide a general introduction to linguistics for philosophers; readers seeking that should consult a suitable textbook such as Akmajian et al. (2010) or Napoli (1996). For a general history of Western linguistic thought, including recenttheoretical linguistics, see Seuren (1998). Newmeyer (1986) is usefuladditional reading for post-1950 American linguistics. Tomalin (2006) traces the philosophical, scientific, and linguistic antecedents of Chomsky's magnum opus (1955/1956; published1975), and Scholz and Pullum (2007) provide a critical review.","urldate":"2017-04-01","booktitle":"The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy","publisher":"Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Scholz"],"firstnames":["Barbara","C."],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Pelletier"],"firstnames":["Francis","Jeffry"],"suffixes":[]},{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Pullum"],"firstnames":["Geoffrey","K."],"suffixes":[]}],"editor":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Zalta"],"firstnames":["Edward","N."],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2016","keywords":"analysis, assertion, compositionality, defaults in semantics and pragmatics, descriptions, empiricism: logical, idiolects, innate/acquired distinction, innateness: and language, language of thought hypothesis, linguistics: computational, logic: intensional, mental representation, pragmatics, propositional attitude reports, reference, relativism, rigid designators","bibtex":"@incollection{scholz_philosophy_2016,\n\tedition = {Winter 2016},\n\ttitle = {Philosophy of {Linguistics}},\n\turl = {https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/linguistics/},\n\tabstract = {Philosophy of linguistics is the philosophy of science as applied to linguistics. This differentiates it sharply from the philosophy of language, traditionally concerned with matters of meaning and reference., As with the philosophy of other special sciences, there are general topics relating to matters like methodology and explanation (e.g., the status of statistical explanations in psychology and sociology, or the physics-chemistry relation in philosophy of chemistry), and more specific philosophical issues that come up in the special science at issue (simultaneity for philosophy of physics; individuation of species and ecosystems for the philosophy of biology). General topics of the first type in the philosophy of linguistics include:, Specific topics include issues in language learnability, language change, the competence-performance distinction, and the expressive power of linguistic theories., There are also topics that fall on the borderline between philosophy of language and philosophy of linguistics: of “linguistic relativity” (see the supplement on the linguistic relativity hypothesis in the Summer 2015 archived version of the entry on relativism), language vs. idiolect, speech acts (including the distinction between locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts), the language of thought, implicature, and the semantics of mental states (see the entries on analysis, semantic compositionality, mental representation, pragmatics, and defaults in semantics and pragmatics). In these cases it is often the kind of answer given and not the inherent nature of the topic itself that determines the classification. Topics that we consider to be more in the philosophy of language than the philosophy of linguistics include intensional contexts, direct reference, and empty names (see the entries on propositional attitude reports, intensional logic, rigid designators, reference, and descriptions). , This entry does not aim to provide a general introduction to linguistics for philosophers; readers seeking that should consult a suitable textbook such as Akmajian et al. (2010) or Napoli (1996). For a general history of Western linguistic thought, including recenttheoretical linguistics, see Seuren (1998). Newmeyer (1986) is usefuladditional reading for post-1950 American linguistics. Tomalin (2006) traces the philosophical, scientific, and linguistic antecedents of Chomsky's magnum opus (1955/1956; published1975), and Scholz and Pullum (2007) provide a critical review.},\n\turldate = {2017-04-01},\n\tbooktitle = {The {Stanford} {Encyclopedia} of {Philosophy}},\n\tpublisher = {Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University},\n\tauthor = {Scholz, Barbara C. and Pelletier, Francis Jeffry and Pullum, Geoffrey K.},\n\teditor = {Zalta, Edward N.},\n\tyear = {2016},\n\tkeywords = {analysis, assertion, compositionality, defaults in semantics and pragmatics, descriptions, empiricism: logical, idiolects, innate/acquired distinction, innateness: and language, language of thought hypothesis, linguistics: computational, logic: intensional, mental representation, pragmatics, propositional attitude reports, reference, relativism, rigid designators},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Scholz, B. C.","Pelletier, F. J.","Pullum, G. K."],"editor_short":["Zalta, E. N."],"key":"scholz_philosophy_2016","id":"scholz_philosophy_2016","bibbaseid":"scholz-pelletier-pullum-philosophyoflinguistics-2016","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/linguistics/"},"keyword":["analysis","assertion","compositionality","defaults in semantics and pragmatics","descriptions","empiricism: logical","idiolects","innate/acquired distinction","innateness: and language","language of thought hypothesis","linguistics: computational","logic: intensional","mental representation","pragmatics","propositional attitude reports","reference","relativism","rigid designators"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0},"search_terms":["philosophy","linguistics","scholz","pelletier","pullum"],"keywords":["analysis","assertion","compositionality","defaults in semantics and pragmatics","descriptions","empiricism: logical","idiolects","innate/acquired distinction","innateness: and language","language of thought hypothesis","linguistics: computational","logic: intensional","mental representation","pragmatics","propositional attitude reports","reference","relativism","rigid designators"],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["W7n7ZGD7akQhMdBQh"]}