Evaluative and Metalinguistic Dispute

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21293667
AutoresAndrés Soria-Ruiz (0000-0002-4592-9783, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, autor de correspondencia)
Año2023
Volumen101
Número1
Páginas165-181
Fecha de publicación2023-01-02
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessNo
TipoARTICLE
RevistaAustralasian Journal of Philosophy (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0004-8402 • E-ISSN: 1470-6828
EditorialInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00048402.2021.1959624
OpenAlexW3216932631
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas7
Referencias citadas17

Recently, the hypothesis that purely evaluative disputes are metalinguistic negotiations has gained traction. I resist a strong version of that hypothesis, and argue that some of those disputes are not metalinguistic negotiations. To defend that claim, I argue that metalinguistic negotiations have three linguistic properties that some purely evaluative disputes lack. First, in a metalinguistic negotiation it is felicitous to embed the dispute-initial statement under the subjective attitude verb consider; second, a speaker can reply to that initial statement by using a metalinguistic comparative; and, third, such negotiations address metalinguistic questions under discussion. Some purely evaluative disputes lack these properties, which suggests that they are not metalinguistic negotiations

Epistemology · Linguistics · Metalinguistics · Negotiation · Political science · Statement (logic) · Vocabulary · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Law · Philosophy · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation