DOCSLIB.ORG

Philosophy of Linguistics Handbook of the Philosophy of Science

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Philosophy of Linguistics Handbook of the Philosophy of Science Philosophy of Linguistics Handbook of the Philosophy of Science General Editors Dov M. Gabbay Paul Thagard John Woods Handbook of Philosophy of Science Volume 14 Philosophy of Linguistics Edited by Ruth Kempson King' s College London, UK Tim Fernando Trinity College Dublin, Ireland Nicholas Asher CNRS Laboratoire IRIT, Universit Paul Sabatier, France AMSTERDAM • BOSTON • HEIDELBERG • LONDON • NEW YORK • OXFORD PARIS • SAN DIEGO • SAN FRANCISCO • SINGAPORE • SYDNEY • TOKYO North Holland is an imprint of Elsevier North Holland is an imprint of Elsevier The Boulevard, Langford lane, Kidlington, Oxford, OX5 1GB, UK Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands First edition 2012 Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (+44) (0) 1865 843830; fax (+44) (0) 1865 853333; email: [email protected]. Alternatively you can submit your request online by visiting the Elsevier web site at http://elsevier.com/locate/permissions, and selecting Obtaining permission to use Elsevier material British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN: 978-0-444-51747-0 For information on all North Holland publications visit our web site at elsevierdirect.com Printed and bound in Great Britain 12 13 14 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 GENERAL PREFACE Dov Gabbay, Paul Thagard, and John Woods Whenever science operates at the cutting edge of what is known, it invariably runs into philosophical issues about the nature of knowledge and reality. Scientific controversies raise such questions as the relation of theory and experiment, the nature of explanation, and the extent to which science can approximate to the truth. Within particular sciences, special concerns arise about what exists and how it can be known, for example in physics about the nature of space and time, and in psychology about the nature of consciousness. Hence the philosophy of science is an essential part of the scientific investigation of the world. In recent decades, philosophy of science has become an increasingly central part of philosophy in general. Although there are still philosophers who think that theories of knowledge and reality can be developed by pure reflection, much current philosophical work finds it necessary and valuable to take into account relevant scientific findings. For example, the philosophy of mind is now closely tied to empirical psychology, and political theory often intersects with economics. Thus philosophy of science provides a valuable bridge between philosophical and scientific inquiry. More and more, the philosophy of science concerns itself not just with general issues about the nature and validity of science, but especially with particular issues that arise in specific sciences. Accordingly, we have organized this Handbook into many volumes reflecting the full range of current research in the philosophy of science. We invited volume editors who are fully involved in the specific sciences, and are delighted that they have solicited contributions by scientifically-informed philosophers and (in a few cases) philosophically-informed scientists. The result is the most comprehensive review ever provided of the philosophy of science. Here are the volumes in the Handbook: Philosophy of Science: Focal Issues, edited by Theo Kuipers. Philosophy of Physics, edited by Jeremy Butterfield and John Earman. Philosophy of Biology, edited by Mohan Matthen and Christopher Stephens. Philosophy of Mathematics, edited by Andrew Irvine. Philosophy of Logic, edited by Dale Jacquette. Philosophy of Chemistry, edited by Andrea Woody, Robin Hendry and Paul Needham. vi Dov Gabbay, Paul Thagard, and John Woods Philosophy of Statistics, edited by Prasanta S. Bandyopadhyay and Malcolm Forster. Philosophy of Information, edited by Pieter Adriaans and Johan van Benthem. Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, edited by Anthonie Meijers. Philosophy of Complex Systems, edited by Cliff Hooker. Philosophy of Ecology, edited by Bryson Brown, Kent A. Peacock and Kevin deLaplante. Philosophy of Psychology and Cognitive Science, edited by Paul Thagard. Philosophy of Economics, edited by Uskali M¨aki. Philosophy of Linguistics, edited by Ruth Kempson, Tim Fernando and Nicholas Asher. Philosophy of Anthropology and Sociology, edited by Stephen Turner and Mark Risjord. Philosophy of Medicine, edited by Fred Gifford. Details about the contents and publishing schedule of the volumes can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookdescription.editors/BS HPHS/description# description As general editors, we are extremely grateful to the volume editors for arranging such a distinguished array of contributors and for managing their contributions. Production of these volumes has been a huge enterprise, and our warmest thanks go to Jane Spurr and Carol Woods for putting them together. Thanks also to Lauren Schultz and Derek Coleman at Elsevier for their support and direction. CONTRIBUTORS Nicholas Asher CNRS, IRIT, Universit´ePaul Sabatier, France. [email protected] Emmon Bach University of Massachusetts, USA, and SOAS, UK [email protected] Giosu`eBaggio SISSA International School for Advanced Studies, Triest, Italy. [email protected] William O. Beeman University of Minnesota, USA. [email protected] Ronnie Cann University of Edinburgh, UK. [email protected] Philip Carr Universit´ePaul Val´ery, France. [email protected] Wynn Chao SOAS, UK. [email protected] Alexander Clark Royal Holloway University of London, UK. [email protected] Robin Cooper Gothenberg University, Sweden. [email protected] Tim Fernando Trinity College Dublin, Eire. [email protected] Peter Hagoort Radboud Univeristy of Nijmegen and Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, The Netherlands. [email protected] x Contributors Wolfram Hinzen University of Durham, UK. [email protected] James R. Hurford University of Edinburgh, UK. [email protected] Ruth Kempson King’s College London, UK. [email protected] Michiel van Lambalgen University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. [email protected] Shalom Lappin King’s College London, UK. [email protected] Howard Lasnik University of Maryland, USA. [email protected] Sally McConnell-Ginet Cornell University, USA. [email protected] Glyn Morrill Universitat Polit`ecnicade Catalunya, Spain. [email protected] Gerald Penn University of Toronto, Canada. [email protected] Jaroslav Peregrin Academy of Sciences and University of Hradec Kr´alov´e,Czech Republic. [email protected] Robert van Rooij University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. [email protected] Juan Uriagereka University of Maryland, USA. [email protected] Daniel Wedgwood University of Edinburgh, UK. [email protected] EDITORIAL PREFACE Ruth Kempson, Tim Fernando, and Nicholas Asher Ever since the nineteen-sixties, linguistics has been a central discipline of cognitive science, feeding debates within philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, logic, psychology — studies on parsing, production, memory, and acquisition — compu- tational linguistics, anthropology, applied linguistics, and even music. However, one diagnostic attribute of what it takes to be a natural language has been miss- ing from articulation of grammar formalisms. Intrinsic to language is the essential sensitivity of construal of all natural language expressions to the utterance context in which they occur and the interaction with other participants in that same utter- ance context that this context-relativity makes possible, with rich occasion-specific effects depending on particularities of the individual participants. Given the very considerable hurdles involved in grappling with this core property of language, and the lack of suitable formal tools at the time, it is perhaps not surprising that this diagnostic property of natural languages should have been set aside as peripheral when formal modelling of language took off in the mid- nineteen-sixties. However, the methodology that was then set up, despite the welcome clarity to linguistic investigation that it initially secured, has had the effect of imposing a ceiling on the kind of explanations for what the human capacity for language amounts to. The justification for setting aside such a core attribute of language was grounded in the point of departure for the methodologies for formal modelling of languages being explored in the fifties and early sixties. Figures such as Harris, Chomsky, Lambek, each in their different ways transformed language theorising by their com- mitment to articulating formal models of language [Harris, 1951; Chomsky, 1955; Lambek, 1958]. The overwhelming priority at that time was to provide a science of language meeting criteria of empirical verifiability; and context variability was not taken to be relevant to the formal specification of any system meeting such criteria. Rather, grammars were presumed to induce sets of sentences; and the first hurdle was the fact that natural languages allow for infinite variety over and above such context variability, simply because any one sentence can be indefinitely extended. This led
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Issues in Applied Linguistics
    UCLA Issues in Applied Linguistics Title The Practice of Theory in the Language Classroom Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2s36f41d Journal Issues in Applied Linguistics, 18(2) ISSN 1050-4273 Author Norton, Bonny Publication Date 2010 DOI 10.5070/L4182005336 Peer reviewed eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California The Practice of Theory in the Language Classroom Bonny Norton University of British Columbia In this article, the author makes the case that poststructuralist theories of language, identity, and investment can be highly relevant for the practical deci- sion-making of language teachers, administrators and policy makers. She draws on her research in the international community to argue that while markers of identity such as accent, race, and gender impact the relationship between teach- ers and students, what is of far greater importance are the teachers’ pedagogical practices. This research suggests that language teaching is most effective when the teacher recognizes the multiple identities of students, and develops peda- gogical practices that enhance students’ investment in the language practices of the classroom. The author concludes that administrators and policy makers need to be supportive of language teachers as they seek to be more effective in linguistically diverse classrooms. Introduction One of the icons of language teaching in Canada, Mary Ashworth, was often heard to comment, “There is nothing as practical as a good theory.” As the United States struggles to adjust to the challenges and possibilities of linguistic diversity in American classrooms, and how research should inform educational policy mak- ing, I wish to bring theory back into the debate.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Applied Linguistics (3 Credit Hours) Spring 2015 Course
    EDU 204A/B: Introduction to Applied Linguistics (3 Credit Hours) Spring 2015 Conceptual Framework: We believe that teachers are “Developers of Human Potential.” Like Martha Berry, we believe the role of excellent teachers is to help our candidates and the students they teach to reach their full potential by developing their head, heart and hands. Our philosophy and purposes are based on three dimensions to develop teachers and educational leaders who 1) Promote Reflection and Decision Making (head), 2) Facilitate Learning (hands), and (3) Enhance Self and Social Awareness (heart). Each of these dimensions is tied to one or more of the 10 program principals and is demonstrated by our candidates in the coursework, field and clinical experiences. Course Description: This course provides an introduction to the analysis and description of languages in general and English in particular. The major areas of linguistics (phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics) and English grammar in use are presented and discussed with an emphasis on applications, including first and second language acquisition. After an overview of the nature of language, we will study the sounds of language: how they are produced (phonetics), and how they are patterned into words (phonology). Next, we will look at different ways in which languages form words and sentences (morphology and syntax, respectively). Lastly, we will study how meaning is expressed in a language (semantics) and how context interacts with language (pragmatics). Student Learning Outcomes: 1. Appreciate the value and uniqueness in language (INTASC 4) 2. Identify patterns in the English language as a tool of analysis with which to examine language.
    [Show full text]
  • BRIGHTEN: an Exploration of Where the Linguists Are Working Dr. Anna Marie Trester Career Linguist
    BRIGHTEN: An exploration of where the linguists are working Dr. Anna Marie Trester Career Linguist Thinking about careers can tend to be quite linear. Such thinking would lead one to conclude that if one studied linguistics, one ought to be doing something recognizeably “linguistic” as part of one’s subsequent professional expression of that training. I tend to approach the question instead in terms of the kinds of challenges a linguist might be drawn to and then ask: which of her linguistic skills and training does she bring to this work? Often, these are the things that make her uniquely successful! In some fields, linguistic training is known and recognized as valuable. However, in most cases we linguists will need to more actively cultivate opportunities for using our skills. But in just about any work that we do, we will likely find ways to express things like cross-cultural awareness, our ability to abstract away from understanding and misunderstanding, and to apply an empirical orientation to understanding human behavior. Thus, one of my answers to “what can you do with a degree in linguistics?” is BRIGHTEN! This works to gently encourage optimism and serve as a command to gloomy would-be nay-sayers who only want to focus only on the challenges, difficulties, and anxieties of the job search process “hey, the future is BRIGHT!” but the acronym also serves as a handy “world of work” educational tool. BRIGHTEN stands for: Business, Research, Innovation/Industry, Government, Healthcare, Technology, Education/Entrepreneurship, and Non-Profits. These are some of the areas in which the linguists I know have found meaningful professional expression of their skills and training.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy of Linguistics
    Philosophy of Linguistics Brian Rabern Philosophy DSB 4.04c 0131 651 5178 [email protected] Geoff Pullum Linguistics DSB 2.23 0131 650 3603 [email protected] Meetings The class meetings are from 11:00 to 13:00 each Wednesday from 19th September to 28th November in Old Library 2.19, Geography building, Old Infirmary complex (weeks 1–3 and 6–11) and in 01M.469 Teaching Room 12 (Doorway 3), Medical School building. Class meetings are mandatory. Readings Required reading is to be done before the class meets; background reading to be studied as time and specific interests permit. Assessment (i) short paper (1000-1500 words) to be turned in by 5 p.m. on Monday 15th October (topics will be provided); (ii) final essay examination with choice of questions from the whole of the course. Week 1 (19th September; Old Library 2.19): Introduction What linguistics is. Linguistics as a special science. Syntax and semantics as conceived in logic. Charles Morris’s trichotomy of syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Philosophy of science applied to linguistics. Required reading • Hunter, Geoffrey (1971) Metalogic: An Introduction to the Metatheory of Standard First Order Logic (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 4–13. Background reading • Stainton, Robert (2014) ‘Philosophy of linguistics’, Oxford Handbooks Online. Online at https://works.bepress.com/robertstainton/126/ Week 2 (26th September; Old Library 2.19): Language and languages The metaphysics of linguistics. The vexed question of whether language should be regarded as psychological, social, or purely abstract. The descriptive linguistics of the American structuralists and the mentalist/cognitive backlash; ‘God’s truth’ (realism) vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics CAROL A
    Introduction to The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics CAROL A. CHAPELLE The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics is a reference work encompassing the range of research on language-related problems that arise in the real-world contexts where languages are learned and used. Because of the wide range of issues that applied linguists work on, a precise defi nition of the fi eld is diffi cult to articulate. In his 2007 Introduction to Applied Linguistics, Davies points out that one might be tempted to conclude that “because language is everywhere, applied linguistics is the science of everything,” but such a conclusion would be neither correct nor useful (Davies, 2007, p. 2). If applied linguistics is not the science of everything, how is it defi ned? Simpson, the editor of The Routledge Handbook of Applied Linguistics, defi nes applied linguistics as “the academic fi eld which connects knowledge about language to decision- making in the real world . In this sense applied linguistics mediates between theory and practice” (Simpson, 2011, p. 1). In The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics, in place of a defi nition, Kaplan indicates that “Applied linguistics is a diffi cult notion to defi ne.” He goes on to say that the Handbook does not “provide a defi nitive defi nition of the fi eld,” and then explains the historical origin of the fi eld through the efforts of language teachers wanting to distance themselves from their colleagues teaching literature (Kaplan, 2010, p. vi). These two very recent books provide a wealth of examples of work in applied linguistics, which help to demonstrate the diffi culty the editors faced in constructing a usefully precise and inclusively accurate defi nition of the fi eld.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 Linguistics As a Science of Structure Ryan M
    Chapter 7 Linguistics as a science of structure Ryan M. Nefdt University of the Western Cape Generative linguistics has rapidly changed during the course of a relatively short period. This has caused many to question its scientific status as a realist scientific theory (Stokhof & van Lambalgen 2011; Lappin et al. 2000). In this chapter, I argue against this conclusion. Specifically, I claim that the mathematical foundations of the science present a different story below the surface. I agree with critics that due to the major shifts in theory over the past 80 years, linguistics is indeed opened up to the problem of pessimistic meta-induction or radical theory change. However, I further argue that a structural realist approach (Ladyman 1998; French 2006) can save the field from this problem and at the same time capture its structural nature. I discuss particular historical instances of theory change in generative grammar as evidence for this interpretation and finally attempt to extend it beyond the gener- ative tradition to encompass previous frameworks in linguistics. 1 Introduction The generativist revolution in linguistics started in the mid-1950s, inspired in large part by insights from mathematical logic and in particular proof theory. Since then, generative linguistics has become a dominant paradigm, with many connections to both the formal and natural sciences. At the centre of the newly established discipline was the syntactic or formal engine, the structures of which were revealed through modelling grammatical form. The generativist paradigm in linguistics initially relied heavily upon the proof-theoretic techniques intro- duced by Emil Post and other formal logicians to model the form language takes (Tomalin 2006; Pullum 2011; 2013).1 Yet despite these aforementioned formal be- ginnings, the generative theory of linguistics has changed its commitments quite 1Here my focus will largely be on the formal history of generative syntax but I will make some comments on other aspects of linguistics along the way.
    [Show full text]
  • Aristotle on Verbal Communication: the First Chapters of De Interpretatione
    EJPC 7 (2) pp. 239–253 Intellect Limited 2016 Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication Volume 7 Number 2 © 2016 Intellect Ltd Critical Review. English language. doi: 10.1386/ejpc.7.2.239_3 CRITICAL REVIEW ANITA KASABOVA Sofia University VLADIMIR MARINOV New Bulgarian University Aristotle on verbal communication: The first chapters of De Interpretatione ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This article deals with the communicational aspects of Aristotle’s theory of significa- Aristotle tion as laid out in the initial chapters of the De Interpretatione (Int.).1 We begin De Interpretatione by outlining the reception and main interpretations of the chapters under discussion, verbal communication rather siding with the linguistic strand. We then argue that the first four chap- signification ters present an account of verbal communication, in which words signify things via linguistic expressions thoughts. We show how Aristotle determines voice as a conventional and hence acci- convention dental medium of signification: words as ‘spoken sounds’ are tokens of thoughts, language use which in turn are signs or natural likenesses of things. We argue that, in this way, 1. We follow the standard linguistic expressions may both signify thoughts and refer to things. This double edition of the Greek account of signification also explains the variety of ontological, logical and psycho- text of Int. by Minio- logical interpretations of the initial chapters of Int. Paluello (1949: 47–72), unless otherwise stated. All references to Aristotle’s works 239 11_EJPC 7.2_Critical review article_239-253.indd 239 11/22/16 1:55 PM Anita Kasabova and Vladimir Marinov follow the citation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Boyce Brandom Addresses
    Brandom Curriculum Vitae Robert Boyce Brandom Addresses Office Home Philosophy Department 1118 King Ave. 1001 Cathedral of Learning Pittsburgh, PA 15206-1437 University of Pittsburgh U.S.A Pittsburgh, PA 15260 U.S.A. ORCID 0000-0001-5478-8567 Telephone Email Office: 412-624-5776 [email protected] Fax: 412-624-5377 Home: 412-661-6190 Web http://www.pitt.edu/~rbrandom Academic Positions Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh (2007-present) Fellow, Center for the Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh (1977–present) Spinoza Chair, University of Amsterdam (2021) Cardinal Mercier Chair, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (2020) Leibniz Professor, Universität Leipzig (2008) Fellow, All Souls College, Oxford (2006) Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences Stanford University (2002-2003) Distinguished Service Professor of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh (1998-2006) Professor, Philosophy Department, University of Pittsburgh (1991–1998) Associate Professor, Philosophy Department, University of Pittsburgh (1981–1990) Assistant Professor, Philosophy Department, University of Pittsburgh (1976–1981) 1 Brandom Honors and Awards Fellow, British Academy (elected 2018) Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences (elected 2000) Anneliese Maier Forschungspreis, Alexander von Humboldt Stiftung (€ 250,000) (2014) Distinguished Achievement in the Humanities Award, Andrew W. Mellon Foundation ($1,500,000) (2004) Jean-Pierre Barricelli Book Prize, (for A Spirit of Trust), best book on Romanticism International Conference on Romanticism (2019) Education Ph.D. Philosophy: 1977, Princeton University Thesis: Practice and Object Directors: Richard Rorty and David K. Lewis Porter Ogden Jacobus Fellow, Princeton, 1975–76 Whiting Fellow, 1974–76 B.A. 1972, Yale University Summa cum laude Honors with Exceptional Distinction, Philosophy Phi Beta Kappa, 1971 Languages English: Native Speaker German: Reading French: Reading Python Erdős Number: 5 2 Brandom Publications Books: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Sample Reading List in French Linguistics Général Sujets Particuliers
    Sample reading list in French Linguistics Général Chapitres sélectionnés des ouvrages suivants : Bourdieu, Pierre. 1982. Ce que parler veut dire : l’économie des échanges linguistiques. Paris:Fayard. Lodge, R. Anthony. 1993. French: From dialect to standard. New York/London: Routledge. Fagyal, Z., Kibbee, D., Jenkins, F. 2006. French: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Armstrong, N., Pooley, T. 2010. Social and Linguistic Change in European French. New York: Pallsgrave Macmillan. Sujets particuliers (based primarily on reading lists covered in courses taken by the candidate): Sociophonétique Articles and chapters: Armstrong, N. and Low, J. 2008. C’est encore plus jeuli, le Mareuc: some evidence for the spread of ‘o’-fronting in French. Transactions of the Philological Society, 106(3):432–455. Brousseau, A-M. 2005. The Sociolect of 17th and 18th Century French Settlers: Phonological Cues from French Creoles, U.Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 10(2), 45-59. Carton, F. 1999. L'Epithèse vocalique en français contemporain: étude phonétique. Faits de langue, 13 : 35-45. Chalier, M. 2019. La norme de prononciation québécoise en changement (1970–2008) ? L'affrication de /t, d/ et l'antériorisation de /ɑ̃/ chez les présentateurs des journaux télévisés de Radio-Canada. La Revue Canadienne Chekin, P. 2018. Jean de Joinville and the Old French rhotic consonant. Zeitschrift für Romanische Philologie 134(4), 985-1007. Colantoni, L., & Steele, J. 2007. Acquiring /R/ in context. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29(3), 381-406. Dalola, A., Bridwell, K. 2019. The shape of [u]: Towards a Typology and Final Vowel Devoicing in Continental French. Proceedings of the 19th ICPhS, Melbourne, Australia, 106(3):432–455.
    [Show full text]
  • Linguistics As a Resouvce in Language Planning. 16P
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 095 698 FL 005 720 AUTHOR Garvin, Paul L. TITLE' Linguistics as a Resouvce in Language Planning. PUB DATE Jun 73 NOTE 16p.; PaFPr presented at the Symposium on Sociolinguistics and Language Planning (Mexico City, Mexico, June-July, 1973) EPRS PPICE MF-$0.75 HC-$1.50 PLUS POSTAGE DESCRIPTORS *Applied Linguistics; Language Development; *Language Planning; Language Role; Language Standardization; Linguistics; Linguistic Theory; Official Languages; Social Planning; *Sociolinguistics ABSTPACT Language planning involves decisions of two basic types: those pertaining to language choice and those pertaining to language development. linguistic theory is needed to evaluate the structural suitability of candidate languages, since both official and national languages mast have a high level of standardizaticn as a cultural necessity. On the other hand, only a braodly conceived and functionally oriented linguistics can serve as a basis for choosiag one language rather than another. The role of linguistics in the area of language development differs somewhat depending on whether development is geared in a technological and scientific or a literary, artistic direction. In the first case, emphasis is on the development of terminologies, and in the second case, on that of grammatical devices and styles. Linguistics can provide realistic and practical arguments in favor of language development, and a detailed, technical understanding of such development, as well as methodological skills. Linguists can and must function as consultants to those who actually make decisions about language planning. For too long linguists have pursued only those aims generated within their own field. They must now broaden their scope to achieve the kind of understanding of language that is necessary for a productive approach to concrete language problems.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is Linguistics?
    What is Linguistics? Matilde Marcolli MAT1509HS: Mathematical and Computational Linguistics University of Toronto, Winter 2019, T 4-6 and W 4, BA6180 MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics • Linguistics is the scientific study of language - What is Language? (langage, lenguaje, ...) - What is a Language? (lange, lengua,...) Similar to `What is Life?' or `What is an organism?' in biology • natural language as opposed to artificial (formal, programming, ...) languages • The point of view we will focus on: Language is a kind of Structure - It can be approached mathematically and computationally, like many other kinds of structures - The main purpose of mathematics is the understanding of structures MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics Language Families - Niger-Congo (1,532) - Austronesian (1,257) - Trans New Guinea (477) - Sino-Tibetan (449) - Indo-European (439) - Afro-Asiatic (374) - Nilo-Saharian (205) - Oto-Manguean (177) - Austro-Asiatic (169) - Tai-Kadai (92) - Dravidian (85) - Creole (82) - Tupian (76) - Mayan (69) - Altaic (66) - Uto-Aztecan (61) MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics - Arawakan (59) - Torricelli (56) - Sepik (55) - Quechuan (46) - Na-Dene (46) - Algic (44) - Hmong-Mien (38) - Uralic (37) - North Caucasian (34) - Penutian (33) - Macro-Ge (32) - Ramu-Lower Sepik (32) - Carib (31) - Panoan (28) - Khoisan (27) - Salishan (26) - Tucanoan (25) - Isolated Languages (75) MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics MAT1509HS Win2019: Linguistics Linguistics The Indo-European Language Family: Phylogenetic Tree
    [Show full text]
  • A Methodological Turn in Political Philosophy: Making Political Philosophy More Scientific?1 Tereza Křepelová Masaryk University, Brno
    Public Reason 10 (2) - Public Reason 11 (1): 77-92 © 2019 by Public Reason A Methodological Turn in Political Philosophy: Making Political Philosophy More Scientific?1 Tereza Křepelová Masaryk University, Brno Abstract: The emergence of the first literature concerning the methodology of political philosophy, which we have witnessed over the last decade, indicates a general methodological shift within the discipline. This shift can be interpreted as a sign of the ongoing adjustment of political philosophy to the domain of science that had already begun when analytical political philosophy incorporated from logical positivism the premise of the unity of method of science and philosophy. The urge to have an epistemic source of justification for normative political theories lead analytical political philosophy to the development of various methodological frameworks from among which reflective equilibrium became the most influential one and nowadays it is being considered as the most widely used method in the contemporary political philosophy overall. Reflective equilibrium aims to provide knowledge that falls into the same category as scientific knowledge; however, it can also lead to various normative distortions resulting in the elimination of metaphysics, meta-ethics and religious claims from the normative part of political philosophical theorising. These normative distortions not only can result in epistemically wrong conclusions; above all, they implicitly affirm the normative propositions of political conceptions of liberalism. Hence, the prevalence and uncritical use of reflective equilibrium might narrow the topical scope and undermine the reflective and critical role of the discipline of political philosophy itself. Key words: political science, political philosophy, methodology, analytical political philosophy, logical positivism, political liberalism, epistemic value, epistemic justification, reflective equilibrium, philosophy of science.
    [Show full text]