more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 22282

[filed under theme 19. Language / C. Assigning Meanings / 4. Compositionality ]

Full Idea

Some authors urge the strong notion of 'direct compositionality', which requires that the content of a sentence be explained in terms of the contents of the component parts of that very sentence.

Gist of Idea

'Direct compositonality' says the components wholly explain a sentence meaning

Source

Michael Potter (The Rise of Analytic Philosophy 1879-1930 [2020], 05 'Sem')

Book Ref

Potter,Michael: 'The Rise of Anaytic Philosophy 1879-1930' [Routledge 2020], p.41


A Reaction

The alternative is that meaning is fully explained by an analysis, but that may contain more than the actual components of the sentence.

Related Idea

Idea 22283 Compositionality should rely on the parsing tree, which may contain more than sentence components [Potter]


The 16 ideas with the same theme [sentence meaning as built up from its components]:

Frege's account was top-down and decompositional, not bottom-up and compositional [Frege, by Potter]
Propositions are understood via their constituents [Wittgenstein]
Propositions use old expressions for a new sense [Wittgenstein]
Compositionality explains how long sentences work, and truth conditions are the main compositional feature [Davidson, by Lycan]
If you assign semantics to sentence parts, the sentence fails to compose a whole [Davidson]
Encountering novel sentences shows conclusively that meaning must be compositional [Peacocke]
The content of an assertion can be quite different from compositional content [Yablo]
Negative existentials with compositionality make the whole sentence meaningless [Read]
Compositonality is a way to build up the truth-conditions of a sentence [Hofweber]
Compositionality should rely on the parsing tree, which may contain more than sentence components [Potter]
'Direct compositonality' says the components wholly explain a sentence meaning [Potter]
Compositionality is more welcome in logic than in linguistics (which is more contextual) [Potter]
Weaker compositionality says meaningful well-formed sentences get the meaning from the parts [Magidor]
Strong compositionality says meaningful expressions syntactically well-formed are meaningful [Magidor]
Understanding unlimited numbers of sentences suggests that meaning is compositional [Magidor]
Semantic theories show how truth of sentences depends on rules for interpreting and joining their parts [Schroeter]