Polysemy does not exist, at least not in the relevant sense

Bibliographic Data

ID21502003
AuthorsGene Brody (0000-0003-3427-6294, Department of Cognitive, Linguistic & Psychological Sciences Brown University Providence Rhode Island USA, corresponding author), Roman Feiman (0000-0003-3262-0901, Department of Cognitive, Linguistic & Psychological Sciences Brown University Providence Rhode Island USA)
Year2024
Volume39
Issue2
Pages179-200
Publication date2024-04-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueMind & Language (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0268-1064 • E-ISSN: 1468-0017
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/mila.12474
OpenAlexW4386023370
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited60

Based on the existence of polysemy (e.g., lunch can refer to both food and events), it is argued that central tenets of externalist semantics and Fodorian concept atomism, an externalist theory on which words lack semantic structure, are unsound. We evaluate the premise that these arguments rely on—that polysemous words have separate, finer‐grained senses. We survey the evidence across psychology and linguistics and argue that it shows that polysemy does not exist, at least not in this “sense”. The upshot is that if polysemy does not exist, it cannot pose a problem for atomism or externalism

Atomism · Epistemology · Extensionality · Externalism · Linguistics · Polysemy · Premise · Computer Science · Language and cultural evolution · Language, Metaphor, and Cognition · Philosophy · Psychology · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access