Understanding Language

Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

My dissertation concerns the nature of linguistic understanding. A standard view about linguistic understanding is that it is a propositional knowledge state. The following is an instance of this view: given a speaker S and an expression alpha that means M, S understand alpha just in case S knows that alpha means M. I refer to this as the epistemic view of linguistic understanding. The epistemic view would appear to be a mere conceptual truth about linguistic understanding, since it is entailed by the following two claims that themselves seem to be mere conceptual truths: S understands alpha iff S knows what alpha means, and---given that a means M--- S knows what alpha means iff S knows that alpha means M. I argue, however, that this is not a mere conceptual truth. Contrary to the epistemic view, propositional knowledge of the meaning of alpha is not necessary for understanding alpha. I argue that linguistic understanding does not even require belief. My positive proposal is that our understanding of language is typically realized, at least in native speakers, as a perceptual capacity. Evidence from cognitive neuropsychology suggests that our perceptual experience of language comes to us already semantically interpreted. We perceive a speaker's utterance as having content, and it is by perceiving the speaker's utterances as having the right content that we understand what the speaker says. We count as understanding language in virtue of having this capacity to understand what speakers say when they use language. This notion of perceiving an utterance as having content gets analyzed in terms of Dretske's account of representation in terms of a teleological notion of function: you perceive a speaker's utterance as having content when the utterance produces in you a perceptual state that has a certain function in your psychology. I show how this view about the nature of linguistic understanding provides an attractive account of how identity claims can be semantically informative, as opposed to merely pragmatically informative, an account that avoids the standard difficulties for Fregean views that attempt to account for the informativeness of identity claims in terms of their semantics

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,597

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Linguistic understanding: perception and inference.Anna Drożdżowicz & Kim Pedersen Phillips - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.
On the Epistemology and Psychology of Speech Comprehension.Dean Pettit - 209 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5:9.
The Rational Roles of Experiences of Utterance Meanings.Berit Brogaard - 2024 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 4.
Wittgenstein as a Gricean Intentionalist.Elmar Geir Unnsteinsson - 2016 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 24 (1):155-172.
Understanding as immersion.R. M. Sainsbury - 2006 - Philosophical Issues 16 (1):246–262.
Inferential practical knowledge of meaning.Brendan Balcerak Jackson - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.
Toward a Theory of Linguistic Knowledge.Brian D. Brost - 2000 - Dissertation, The University of Wisconsin - Madison

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
6 (#1,698,613)

6 months
6 (#876,365)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

On the Epistemology and Psychology of Speech Comprehension.Dean Pettit - 209 - The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 5:9.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references