Vol. 31 No. 1 (2011)
Dossier

Referencia, estructuras y universalidad expresiva

PDF (Español (España))
  • Alberto Moretti
Alberto Moretti
Universidad de Buenos Aires / CONICET
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36446/af.2011.125

Published 2011-05-01

Keywords

  • Linguistic meaning,
  • Syntacticism,
  • Universal expressibility
  • Significado lingüístico,
  • Universalidad expresiva,
  • Sintacticismo
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Gregorio Klimovsky argued against syntactical analyses of the notion of language. In this paper I examine his arguments, noting their links with recent discussions of universal expressibility, and raise some plausible objections. Afterwards I adopt a general approach to the issue which is incompatible with strict syntacticism but allowing an acceptable reformulation, associated with a minimalist notion of the scope of the semantic theory.

PDF (Español (España))

References

  1. Black, M. (1946), “Russell’s Philosophy of Language”, en Schilpp, P. (ed), The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell, Evanston, Northwestern University.
  2. Carnap, R. (1938), “Foundations of Logic and Mathematics”, en Neurath, O., Carnap, R. y Morris, C. (eds), International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Vol. I, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
  3. Hintikka, J. (1997), Lingua Universalis vs. Calculus Ratiocinator, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Kluwer.
  4. Klimovsky, G. (1982), “Metalenguaje, jerarquía de lenguajes”, Revista Cuadernos del Psicoanálisis, 12 (2), Buenos Aires, 1982, reimpreso en Klimovsky, G. (2004), Epistemología y Psicoanálisis, Volumen I, Buenos Aires, Ediciones Biebel, pp. 71-90.
  5. Klimovsky, G. (1984), “Significación, lenguaje y metalenguaje”, en Psicoanálisis (APdeBA), N° 1, Buenos Aires, 1984, reimpreso en Klimovsky, G. (2004), Epistemología y Psicoanálisis, Volumen I, Buenos Aires, Ediciones Biebel, pp. 91-99. Cf. p. 91.
  6. van Heijenoort, J. (1967), “Logic as Calculus and Logic as Language”, Synthese, 17, pp.324-330.