Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

A dish may be delicious, a painting beautiful, a piece of information justified. Whether the attributed properties "really" hold, seems to depend on somebody like a speaker or a group of people that share standards and background. Relativists and contextualists differ in where they locate the dependency theoretically. This book collects papers that corroborate the contextualist view that the dependency is part of the language. This volume contributes to the debate on relativism vs. contextualism. It comprises a collection of papers that take the problem of “faultless disagreement” as their starting point. The contributors all criticize the relativist view that the variability in subjective judgments necessitates the variability of the notion of truth dependent on a judge or assessor. They investigate the problem of faultless disagreement by investigating differences and similarities between subjective judgments with epistemic modals on the one hand and predicates of personal taste on the other. Importantly, they also draw on data beyond taste and knowledge, including data from language acquisition. The theoretical analyses are quite diverse. But all proposals are compatible with the contextualist view – that the variability in subjective judgments is an effect of how the meaning of an expression is understood. The volume is relevant for linguists and philosophers of language interested in the problem of faultless disagreement and the semantics and pragmatics of modals and adjectives.

Lexicology. Semantics --- Intersubjectivité --- Implicite (linguistique) --- Hypothèse de Sapir-Whorf --- Subjectivity. --- Relativity. --- Relativism --- Knowledge, Theory of --- Reality --- Relationism --- Subjectivism --- Relativity --- Hypothèse de Sapir-Whorf. --- Intersubjectivité. --- Judgement. --- Modal Verbs. --- Semantics.

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Japanese has a term that covers both green and blue. Russian has separate terms for dark and light blue. Does this mean that Russians perceive these colors differently from Japanese people? Does language control and limit the way we think?This short, opinionated book addresses the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which argues that the language we speak shapes the way we perceive the world. Linguist John McWhorter argues that while this idea is mesmerizing, it is plainly wrong. It is language that reflects culture and worldview, not the other way around. The fact that a language has only one word for eat, drink, and smoke doesn't mean its speakers don't process the difference between food and beverage, and those who use the same word for blue and green perceive those two colors just as vividly as others do.McWhorter shows not only how the idea of language as a lens fails but also why we want so badly to believe it: we're eager to celebrate diversity by acknowledging the intelligence of peoples who may not think like we do. Though well-intentioned, our belief in this idea poses an obstacle to a better understanding of human nature and even trivializes the people we seek to celebrate. The reality -- that all humans think alike -- provides another, better way for us to acknowledge the intelligence of all peoples.

Psycholinguistics --- Sociolinguistics --- Language and culture. --- Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. --- Relativity (Linguistics) --- Whorf-Sapir hypothesis --- Anthropological linguistics --- Culture and language --- Culture --- Language and culture --- Sapir-Whorf hypothesis --- Langage et culture. --- Hypothèse de Sapir-Whorf.