more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 2761

[filed under theme 19. Language / A. Nature of Meaning / 7. Meaning Holism / b. Language holism ]

Full Idea

It is clearly possible to learn a language from scratch, because we have all done it, but if holism is true and the meaning of each sentence depends on the meanings of others, how did we do it?

Gist of Idea

If the meanings of sentences depend on other sentences, how did we learn language?

Source

Jonathan Dancy (Intro to Contemporary Epistemology [1985], 7.2)

Book Ref

Dancy,Jonathan: 'Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology' [Blackwell 1985], p.100


A Reaction

The question of 'how did it ever get started?' actually seems to block almost every explanation of everything that ever happens. How do I begin to move my hand?


The 16 ideas with the same theme [meaning always involves an entire language]:

Holism says all language use is also a change in the rules of language [Frege, by Dummett]
To understand a sentence means to understand a language [Wittgenstein]
There is an attempt to give a verificationist account of meaning, without the error of reducing everything to sensations [Dennett on Quine]
Meaning holism tried to show that you can't get fixed meanings built out of observation terms [Putnam]
Understanding a sentence involves background knowledge and can't be done in isolation [Putnam]
Holism seems to make fixed definition more or less impossible [Putnam]
Can meanings remain the same when beliefs change? [Rorty]
The pattern of sentences held true gives sentences their meaning [Davidson]
If to understand "fish" you must know facts about them, where does that end? [Fodor]
For holists no two thoughts are ever quite the same, which destroys faith in meaning [Fodor]
If the meanings of sentences depend on other sentences, how did we learn language? [Dancy,J]
Meaning holism is a crazy doctrine [Fodor]
Holism cannot give a coherent account of scientific methodology [Wright,C, by Miller,A]
Semantic holism means new evidence for a belief changes the belief, and we can't agree on concepts [Rey]
If some inferences are needed to fix meaning, but we don't know which, they are all relevant [Fodor/Lepore, by Boghossian]
To understand 'birds warble' and 'tigers growl', you must also understand 'tigers warble' [Heil]