Abstract
The paper focuses on the relationship between word meaning and utterance meaning and refers to a controversy within ordinary language philosophy. On the one hand, the thesis is put forward that speech-act theory cannot be used to explain the meaning of words; on the other hand, there are a number of philosophers who obviously assume that it is possible to grasp the meaning of a word by referring to the speech act in which it occurs. Using an example by Strawson, The ice over there is very thin, I discuss the problem in the light of an action-oriented theory of language, and attempt to generalize the findings gained from the analysis of Strawson's example.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
