Biosemantics and Words that Don't Represent
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20143715 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Ruth Garrett Millikan (0000-0003-1513-1049, University of Connecticut, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 84 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 229-241 |
| Publication date | 2018-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theoria (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0040-5825 • E-ISSN: 1755-2567 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/theo.12146 |
| OpenAlex | W2808237940 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 10 |
One of the virtues of the biosemantic view of language is the clarity and simplicity of its description of the general nature of nonrepresentational linguistic constructions. It doesn't follow, however, that it is obvious on this view how these functions should be described individually. After an explanation of the biosemantic approach, initial suggestions are made for analyses of a variety of nonrepresentational constructions that have traditionally been considered problematic. Included are “not”, “is” (of identity), “exists”, “means”, “but”, “if ... then”, “possibly” and “true.”
Aesthetics · CLARITY · Epistemology · Identity (music) · Linguistics · Simplicity · Sociology · Variety (cybernetics) · Artificial Intelligence · Chemistry · Computer Science · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Language and cultural evolution · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
| Unique citing works | 3 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,38 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2023 (6) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 3 |