more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Holism says that nothing that can be said in one language can be said in another one. The expressibility hypothesis says that everything that can be said in one language can be said in every other one.
Gist of Idea
Holism says language can't be translated; the expressibility hypothesis says everything can
Source
Thomas Hofweber (Inexpressible Properties and Propositions [2006], 6.4)
Book Ref
'Oxford Studies in Metaphysics vol.2', ed/tr. Zimmerman,Dean W. [OUP 2006], p.203
A Reaction
Obviously expressibility would only refer to reasonably comprehensive languages (with basic logical connectives, for example). Personally I vote for the expressibility hypothesis, which Hofweber seems to favour.
| 18285 | All translation loses some content (but language does not create reality) [Carnap] |
| 23489 | We translate by means of proposition constituents, not by whole propositions [Wittgenstein] |
| 19045 | Translation is too flimsy a notion to support theories of cultural incommensurability [Quine] |
| 12591 | Mastery of a language requires thinking, and not just communication [Harman] |
| 4706 | Early Quine says all beliefs could be otherwise, but later he said we would assume mistranslation [O'Grady] |
| 17991 | Holism says language can't be translated; the expressibility hypothesis says everything can [Hofweber] |