Meaning and Representational Format: 1957 and all that
Informal e-seminar for Fall 2020
Last spring, I taught a seminar that was
related to a book I’m working on—The Vocabulary of
Meanings, which will be a kind of sequel to Conjoining
Meanings (OUP, 2018). For various reasons, I
thought it might be useful to offer an informal and edited version
this term, as something between a seminar and a directed reading
group. But it will be neither a course nor a Rutgers event in any
sense. Nobody will be doing this for course credit with me, and my
expectation is that most of the participants will not be from
Rutgers or our local consortium. I have included a brief
description of the topic and a tentative schedule below. Each
week, after the intro session on Sept. 14, I’ll post some slides
(sometimes narrated) a day or two in advance. The intended format
for Monday meetings will be that for the first hour, I'll present
some stuff--often, by running through main points of the slides
quickly and then focusing on some bit of whatever reading is on
the agenda for that week--and the second hour will be a more open
discussion, with beverages of choice encouraged. If there is
interest in occasionally adding a short session (say, half an hour
before or after the regular slot) for a focused discussion of a
particular issue, or a "tutorial" on some technical topic, I'm
open to that. I'm also open to modifying the readings as we go
along if that makes sense given peoples' interests. But
participants should feel totally free to attend only the weeks
they want to. Life is complicated, especially at the moment; and
sometimes, another zoom meeting is just too much.
In the late 1950s, Noam Chomsky revolutionized
the study of the spoken languages that humans regularly acquire.
But it’s sometimes thought that from 1957-1967, Chomsky was
ignoring meaning in order to focus on syntax—and that he was or
became hostile to the study of meaning, at least after the period
of 1967-1975, when some combination of Davidson, Lewis, Montague,
Kripke, and Putnam made it seem that the study of meaning (a.k.a.
semantics) is an externalist enterprise. I’ve come to think that
the actual history is rather different and more interesting, that
Kripke is often misread, that the usual arguments for meaning
externalism are not good, and that the net result has inhibited
progress on fundamental questions that were posed 60 years ago. In what sense, or senses, is a
language like spoken English recursive?
In what sense, or senses, is a
language like spoken English recursive?
Why do the non-atomic
expressions of such languages exhibit constituency
structure, and do such expressions have structured meanings?
If so, how are these meanings structured, and what are their constituents?
We should consider these questions and the answers that Chomsky’s early work suggested before simply assuming that linguistic meanings determine extensions, and that declarative sentences have truth conditions. These assumptions, either of which can be seen as a corollary of the other, invite a question that has become familiar: what (if anything) does a theory of meaning for a language need to do in addition to specifying extensions for expressions of the language? But in my view, this familiar question is fundamentally misguided and misguiding. I think it has led to distorted conceptions of lexical items, semantic composition, and the “implication” relations exhibited by complex expressions. Conjoining Meanings was largely about composition. So I’ll focus on the polysemy or “conceptual equivocality” of open-class lexical items—including proper nouns and so-called kind terms like ‘water’ and ‘rabbit’—and the importance of representational format, as opposed to truth-theoretic (or model-theoretic) notions, in characterizing implication relations and the meanings of quantificational determiners.
In short: when thinking about meaning, it’s useful to remember what was learned about human languages in the ten years before Davidson conjectured that suitably formulated theories of truth can serve as adequate theories of meaning for these languages; and given that truth-theoretic semantics was never the only game in town, we should ask if it has ever been the best game in town.
Readings, Slides, and Schedule (revisable)
Links to the readings and slides will emerge on this evolving page. While the sessions won't be recorded, I'll provide the slides that I use on Mondays; and I'll try to eventually add narrations, so that this page will be a kind of record.
As noted above, there is a corresponding book in progress, and I'll link to sections of draft chapters/sections when that is relevant (and the sections exist in readable form). Obviously, I won't be discussing all of the readings, at least not in any detail. In weeks where there is a lot, the order of the list will be pretty indicative. If you encounter broken links, please let me know.
AN EXTRA THING:
Fabian Corver has been conducting interviews for a podcast series "Understanding Chomsky." In addition to talking with Chomsky (youtube), Fabian has interviewed John Collins (youtube), Frankie Egan (youtube), John Mikhail (youtube), David Poeppel (youtube), Jim McGilvray (youtube), Norbert Hornstein (youtube), and me (youtube).
Sept 14, 21, 28
1. Overview [slides for Sept 14]
(a) first part of chapter one of The Vocabulary
of Meanings (Pietroski) pdf
2. Back to the 50s: Chomsky and the Hierarchy [slides for Sept 21]
(a) chapters 1-3 and 9 of Syntactic
Structures (Chomsky 1957) pdf
(b) chapter 1 of Syntactic Structures Revisited by Howard Lasnik pdf
(c) “On Certain Formal Properties of Grammars” (Chomsky 1959) pdf
(d) “Meanings via Syntactic Structures” (Pietroski) pdf
Here is a narrated version of some slides about the "Chomsky Hierarchy" mainly for those who are new to this material. For old hands, this will be old hat. But feel free to use and tweak the slides for your own purposes. If you want some closely related text to read, before or after you watch the slides, here's a partial draft of chapter two of The Vocabulary of Meanings.
3. Into the 60s [slides for Sept 28]
(a) Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (Chomsky 1964) pdf
(b) the first chapter of Aspects (Chomsky 1965) pdf
(c) the first few pages of Sound Pattern of English (Chomsky & Halle 1965) pdf
Oct 5, 12, 19, 26
4. Internalist Semantics: Philosophers and Diverging Roads [slides for October 5]
(a) “Structure of a Semantic Theory” (Katz and Fodor, 1963) pdf
(z) a separate topic that I won’t discuss in this setting, at least not in any detail:
Katz and Postal (1964), An Integrated
Theory of Linguistic Descriptions,and the rise/fall of “Generative
In light of some questions after the Oct 5 session--and by email over the last few weeks--I thought it might be useful to post some slides about an initial model of intrinsic meanings. I'm planning to talk about this in connection with (9-11) below. But some people have wanted to know what I have in mind, in at least a little detail, about (i) cashing out Chomsky's references to Humboldt, (ii) preserving a tripartite conception of internalized grammars, pace Katz and Fodor, and (iii) the connection to the proposals in Conjoining Meanings. I don't want to break the flow of the live sessions and insert this into the discussion of the 1960s. But if people want to talk about this separately--before or after some session, using the slides a springboard--I'm happy to do that.
5. Losing Paradise: What’s Truth Got to do With It? [slides for October 12]
(a) “The Logical Form of Action Sentences” (Davidson, 1967a) pdf
(b) “Truth and Meaning” (Davidson 1967) pdf
6. Aliens and Logicians, Round One [slides for October 19]
(a) “Language and Languages” (Lewis 1968/1975) pdf
(b) “General Semantics” (Lewis 1970) pdf
7. Aliens and Logicians, Round Two [slides for October 26]
(a) Lewis readings continues
(b) first part of “English as a Formal Language” (Montague 1970)
(c) helpful ancillary reading: “Meaning and Semantics:
(Harman 1974); “What Model Theoretic Semantics
Cannot Do” (Lepore 1983); “Meaning and
Formal Semantics in Generative Grammar” (Schiffer 2015)
Session 7 is going to spill over into Session
8. So to keep things more or less on track with the schedule, I'll
post some narrated
slides about Lewis and syntax (in lieu of going
through this in detail during a live session) and some narrated
introductory slides about Kripke and reference
(for newcomers to this topic). My hope is that we'll get to
Kripke in the second half of the Nov. 2 session, which will be
review for those familiar with Naming and Necessity,
which Kripke is reviewing in his first Locke Lecture. Then
Nov. 9 can be for his other Locke Lectures, focusing on
Nov 2, 9, 16, 23
Sessions 8-10. Reference and Fiction [Slides for November 2] [Slides for November 9] [Slides for November 16]
(a) excerpts from Reference and Existence, Kripke’s Locke Lectures (1973, published 2014) pdf1 pdf2 pdf3&4 pdf5&6
(b) Preface to Naming and Necessity
I’ll assume familiarity with Naming and Necessity itself, which was presented in Kripke's 1970 lectures at Princeton.
His first Locke Lecture provides a summary of the main points that will be directly relevant for us; and see these slides
(c) Donnellan, "Proper Names & Identifying Descriptions" pdf
Here are some slides about how to combine the
semantics offered in Conjoining Meanings with a
Kripke-style view about negative existentials:
AUX VP and Negative Existentials
I'll try to add some narration soon.
11. Polysemy and Indexicality [slides for November 23]
(a) excerpts from Essays on Form and Interpretation and New Horizons (Chomsky 1977, 2000)
(b) excerpts from Putnam, “The Meaning of 'Meaning'”
(c) “Semantic Internalism” (Pietroski) pdf
Nov 30, Dec. 7, Dec. 14
12. Quantifiers, Meanings, and Mental Representations [slides for November 30]If you want something to read, here is chapter seven of Conjoining Meanings. But it might make more sense to read it after the Nov 30 session.
13. Topic continued, first half presentation
from Tyler Knowlton (see here
for a preview)
(a) “Interface Transparency and the Psychosemantics of Most” (Lidz. et.al. 2011) (a talk version from some years back)(b) More recent work in this vein…currently under review or being written up by Knowlton et.al.
14. TBA, but I do have to give a new talk
("Subjects, Predicates, and Minimal Relations") on Dec. 17th