Advertisement

Indeterminacy of Meaning

  • Bengt-Olof Qvarnström

Abstract

In this paper we shall critically examine the two main arguments that W. V. Quine has presented in various forms to support his thesis of the indeterminacy of translation. If somebody objects that we have, from the very beginning, misrepresented the thesis by calling it “indeterminacy of meaning” whereas Quine names it “indeterminacy of translation”, here is our answer. Since translation as normally understood is a way of explaining meaning and there is considerable evidence that Quine intends that the word “translation” should be understood in its normal sense, his thesis could also be interpreted as a thesis of the indeterminacy of meaning. Here we shall discuss the thesis only in this sense.

Keywords

Language Learning Language Acquisition Concrete Object Single Sentence Meaning Theory 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chomsky, N., 1976, “Reflections on Language,” Temple Smith, London.Google Scholar
  2. Friedman, M., 1975, Physicalism and the Indeterminacy of Translation, Noûs, 9:353–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Føllesdal, D., 1973, Indeterminacy of Translation and Under-Determination of the Theory of Nature, Dialectica, 27:289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Føllesdal, D., 1975, Meaning and Experience, in: “Mind and Language,” S. Guttenplan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Gardner, M. R., 1973, Apparent Conflicts between Quine’s Indeterminacy Thesis and his Philosophy of Science, BJPS, 24:381–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hockney, D., 1975, The Bifurcation of Scientific Theories and Indeterminacy of Translation, PS, 42:411–427.Google Scholar
  7. Quine, W. V., 1960, “Word and Object,” MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  8. Quine, W. V., 1966, “The Ways of Paradox,” Random House, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Quine, W. V., 1969a, Reply to Chomsky, in: “Words and Objections,” D. Davidson and J. Hintikka, eds., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  10. Quine, W. V., 1969b, “Ontological Relativity and Other Essays,” Columbia University Press, New York and London.Google Scholar
  11. Quine, W. V., 1970, On the Reasons for Indeterminacy of Translation, JP, 67:178–183.Google Scholar
  12. Quine, W. V., 1974, “The Roots of Reference,” Open Court, La Salle.Google Scholar
  13. Quine, W. V., 1975a, The Nature of Natural Knowledge, in: “Mind and Language,” S. Guttenplan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  14. Quine, W. V., 1975b, Mind and Verbal Dispositions, in: “Mind and Language,” S. Guttenplan, ed., Clarendon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  15. Quine, W. V., 1975c, On Empirically Equivalent Systems of the World, Erkenntnis, 9:313–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Quine, W. V., and Ullian, J. S., 1978, “The Web of Belief,” Random House, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bengt-Olof Qvarnström
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of TurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations