Essays from my University of London BA Philosophy Studies
Philosophy of Language – [235P210]
- “Many sentences of English have never been uttered, and no one has ever meant anything by uttering them. Therefore their meaning cannot be determined by speaker’s intentions.” Discuss.
- Is knowing a statements truth conditions (a) necessary and (b) sufficient for knowing what it means?
- Can the figure of the radical interpreter cast any light on the notion of meaning?
- “The Gricean line of explanation [of meaning] is hence essentially no more than a sophisticated version of the code conception of language” (Dummett) Discuss.
- “The indeterminacy of translation is just a special case of the under-determination of theory by evidence.” Discuss.
- Is knowing under what conditions a statement is true either necessary or sufficient for knowing what the statement means?
- Assess Quine’s arguments for the view that there is no such thing as meaning.
- In what ways is the semantics of a language compositional? What reasons are there for expecting it to be?
- ‘Kripke’s so-called puzzle about beliefs actually presents us with a quandary about ascriptions of belief.’ Discuss.
- Are the speakers of English that population amongst whom there is a convention to speak English?
- How much of human knowledge of language is innate?
- How does Grice distinguish between the semantic and pragmatic contributions to what speakers convey by their utterances? How plausible is this distinction?
- What basis is there if any, for distinguishing between the illocutionary and the perlocutionary acts performed by making an utterance?