Dummett’s Conception as Theory of Meaning for Hintikka’s Type of Game-theoretical Semantics (I) (‘Use’ and ‘Language-game’ in Wittgenstein and Dummett)

  • Heda Festini


It is well known that three types of semantics have been developed in relation to transformational grammar (TG). From the standpoint of the philosophy of linguistics it seems that the main achievement in the field of semantics for TG are Montague grammar and Lakoff’s (1972) type of fuzzy-set theory. When Hintikka formed his game-theoretic conception, TG had already passed through many phases: in early Chomsky, semantics was independent of syntax; for Katz-Postal the deep structure was semantics; for late Chomsky semantics was dependent on both surface and deep structure; for McCawley and Lakoff the beginning generation of syntax already included semantical representations. Montague pleaded for the parallelism of semantical and syntactical rules. Hintikka’s semantics (1975) represented (according to his own words) a confrontation with Fregean semantics, as was the case with the proposals of Montague and Davidson. Gabbay (1973) described Montague’s grammar as a form of Suppes probabilistic semantics, and it seems very plausible that fuzzy-set theory can also be described as a probabilistic semantics.


Implicit Knowledge Language Game Linguistic Activity Transformational Grammar Context Principle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Dummett, M., 1956, Nominalism, in: “Truth and Other Enigmas,” 1978, Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
  2. Dummett, M., 1959, Truth, in.: ibid.Google Scholar
  3. Dummett, M., 1963, The Philosophical Significance of Gödel’s Theorem, in: ibid.Google Scholar
  4. Dummett, M., 1967, Frege’s Philosophy, in: ibid.Google Scholar
  5. Dummett, M., 1972, Postscript, in: ibid.Google Scholar
  6. Dummett, M., 1973a, “Frege, Philosophy of Language,” Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
  7. Dummett, M., 1973b, The Justification of Deduction, in: “Truth and Other Enigmas,” op.cit.Google Scholar
  8. Dummett, M., 1975a, Can Analytical Philosophy be Systematic, and Ought it to Be?, in: ibid.Google Scholar
  9. Dummett, M., 1975b, Frege’s Distinction between Sense and Reference, in: ibid.Google Scholar
  10. Dummett, M., 1975c, What is a Theory of Meaning? (I), in: “Mind and Language,” S. Guttenplan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  11. Dummett, M., 1976, What is a Theory of Meaning? (II), in: “Truth and Meaning,” G. Evans and J. McDowell, eds., Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  12. Dummett, M., 1978, What Do I Know When I Know a Language?, Lecture at the Centenary Celebrations of the Stockholm University, printed as summary.Google Scholar
  13. Dummett, M., 1979a, Was Frege a Philosopher of Language?. Revue Internat. de Philosophie, 130:786.Google Scholar
  14. Dummett, M., 1979b, What does the Appeal to Use Do for the Theory of Meaning?, in: “Meaning and Use,” A. Margalit, ed., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  15. Dummett, M., 1980, Comments on Professor Prawitz’s Paper, in: “Logic and Philosophy,” G. H. von Wright, ed., Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  16. Dummett, M., 1981, “The Interpretation of Frege’s Philosophy,” Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
  17. Dummett, M., 1982, Realism, Synth., 52:55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Festini, H., 1982, Is Wittgenstein’s Concept of Proposition in Philosophical Grammar Intensional, Extensional, or Something Else?, in: “Language and Ontology. Proceedings of the 6th International Wittgenstein Symposium,” W. Leinfellner, E. Kraemer, and J. Schänk, eds., Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky, Vienna.Google Scholar
  19. Gabbay, D. M., 1973, Representation of the Montague Semantics as a Form of the Suppes Semantics, in: “Approaches to Natural Language,” K. J. J. Hintikka, J. M. E. Moravcsik, and P. Suppes, eds., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  20. Grjaznov, A. F., 1982, Teorija znacenija Majkla Dammita, Voprosy filosofii, 4:114.Google Scholar
  21. Hintikka, K. J. J., 1968, Language-Games for Quantifiers, reprinted in: “Logic, Language-Games and Information,” 1973, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  22. Hintikka, K. J. J., 1969, Quantification and the Picture Theory of Language, reprinted in: ibid.Google Scholar
  23. Hintikka, K. J. J., 1971, Quantifiers, Language-Games, and Transcendental Arguments, reprinted in: ibid.Google Scholar
  24. Hintikka, K. J. J., 1975, On the Limitation of Generative Grammar, in: “Filosofiska Studier, Proceedings of the Scandinavian Seminar on Philosophy of Language,” Uppsala Universitet, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  25. Hintikka, K. J. J., 1976, Language-Games, in: “Game-Theoretical Semantics,” E. Saarinen, ed., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  26. Lakoff, G., 1972, Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts, in: “Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society,” P. M. Peranteau, J. N. Levy, G. C. Phares, eds., University of Michigan, Chicago.Google Scholar
  27. Salmon, N. U., 1982, “Reference and Essence,” Blackwell, London.Google Scholar
  28. Saarinen, E., 1979, Introduction, in: “Game-Theoretical Semantics,” E. Saarinen, ed., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  29. Wittgenstein, L., 1953, “Philosophical Investigations,” (Abb. PI), Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  30. Wittgenstein, L., 1956, “Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics,” (Abb. RFM), Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  31. Wittgenstein, L., 1969, “On Certainty,” (Abb. OC), Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  32. Wittgenstein, L., 1977, “Remarks on Colour,” (Abb. RC), Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  33. Wright, C., 1980, “Wittgenstein on the Foundation of Mathematics,” Duckworth, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heda Festini
    • 1
  1. 1.Filozofski fakultetZadarYugoslavia

Personalised recommendations