Palavras-chave
Enactivism
Language
Cognitive archeology
Como Citar
Resumo
In this paper we suggest that Duffley’s sign-based semantics rests on two main claims: a methodological one and an ontological one. The methodological one is the analysis of corpora and the ontological one is the postulate of mental content. By adopting a linguistic enactivist perspective with a Wittgensteinian twist, we endorse Duffley’s methodological claim and suggest that a sign-based semantics doesn’t have to rely on mental content if it takes into account the conception of meaningful material engagement in cognitive archeology and its development into sign-using as an enactive capacity.
Referências
Bach, Kent (2013). “Replies to My Critics,” Croatian Journal of Philosophy 13: 217-49.
Candlish, S., George W., (2019) Private Language, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2019 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (Ed.).
Cook, R., Bird, G., Catmur, C., Press, C., & Heyes, C. M. (2014). Mirror neurons: From origin to function. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 177-241.
Cuffari, E. (2020). Language, Habit, and the Future. In F. Caruana & I. Testa (Eds.), Habits: Pragmatist Approaches from Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, and Social Theory (pp. 245-263). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/9781108682312.012
Devitt, Michael (2013a). “Good and Bad Bach,” Croatian Journal of Philosophy 38: 169-200.
Di Paolo, E.; Cuffari, E. C.; De Jaegher, H. (2018) Linguistic Bodies: The Continuity Between Life and Language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Duffley, P. (2020) Linguistic Meaning meets Linguistic Form. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gallese, V. (2020). Brain, Body, Habit and the Performative Quality of Aesthetics. In I. Testa & F. Caurana (editors), Habits: Pragmatist Approaches from Cognitive Neuroscience to Social Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2021, in press. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sge5m
Goddard, Cliff. (2010) “The Natural Semantic Metalanguage Approach,” in Bernd Heine (Ed.), Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 459-84.
Jackendoff, Ray. (1990) Semantic Structures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Goddard, Cliff. (1991) “Parts and Boundaries,” in Beth Levin and Steven Pinker (Eds.), Lexical and Conceptual Semantics. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 9-45.
Kiverstein, J., & Rietveld, E. (2021) Scaling-up skilled intentionality to linguistic thought. Synthese, 198(1), 175-194.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2008). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. and Mark Turner (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, Ronald W. (2013). Essentials of Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Malafouris, L. (2013). How things shape the mind: A Theory of Material Engagement. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Malafouris, L. (2019). Mind and material engagement. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 18(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-018-9606-7
Nyckees, Vincent (2007). “La Cognition Humaine Saisie par le Langage: de la Sémantique Cognitive au Médiationnisme,” Corela [on-line] HS-6: 1-46.
Reid, Wallis (1991). Verb and Noun Number in English: A Functional Explanation. London/New York: Longman.
Rolla, G. & Figueiredo, N. M. (2021) Bringing forth a world, literally. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-021-09760-z
Rosch, Eleanor (1978). “Principles of Categorization,” in Eleanor Rosch and Barbara Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 27-48.
Sue, W. (2010). Microaggressions in Everyday Life: Race, Gender, and Sexual Orientation. Wiley-Blackwell
Wittgenstein, L. (2010). Philosophical investigations. Translated by Anscombe, G. E. M., Hacker, P. M. S., & Schulte, J. (Rev. 4th ed). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia