Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGrant, Cosmo(Cosmo Douglas)
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-08T15:48:53Z
dc.date.available2021-02-08T15:48:53Z
dc.date.issued2019-06-07
dc.date.submitted2019-05
dc.identifier.issn1161-9473
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/129701
dc.description.abstractThe Standard View is that, other things equal, speakers’ judgments about the meanings of sentences of their language are correct. After all, we make the meanings, so how wrong can we be about them? The Standard View underlies the Elicitation Method, a typical method in semantic fieldwork, according to which we should work out the truth-conditions of a sentence by eliciting speakers’ judgments about its truth-value in different situations. I put pressure on the Standard View and therefore on the Elicitation Method: for quite straightforward reasons, speakers can be radically mistaken about meanings. Lewis (Convention: A Philosophical Study, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1969) gave a theory of convention in a game-theoretic framework. He showed how conventions could arise from repeated coordination games, and, as a special case, how meanings could arise from repeated signaling games. I put pressure on the Standard View by building on Lewis’s framework. I construct coordination games in which the players can be wrong about their conventions, and signaling games in which the players can be wrong about their messages’ meanings. The key idea is straightforward: knowing your own strategy and payoff needn’t determine what the others do, so leaves room for false beliefs about the convention and meanings. The examples are simple, explicit, new in kind, and based on an independently plausible meta-semantic story.en_US
dc.publisherSpringer Netherlandsen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09656-3en_US
dc.rightsArticle is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use.en_US
dc.sourceSpringer Netherlandsen_US
dc.titleMistakes About Conventions and Meaningsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.citationGrant, Cosmo. “Mistakes About Conventions and Meanings.” Topoi orient-occident, 40 (June 2019): 71–85 © 2019 The Author(s)en_US
dc.contributor.departmentMassachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Linguistics and Philosophyen_US
dc.relation.journalTopoi orient-occidenten_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's final manuscripten_US
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticleen_US
eprint.statushttp://purl.org/eprint/status/PeerRevieweden_US
dc.date.updated2021-02-07T04:23:41Z
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderSpringer Nature B.V.
dspace.embargo.termsY
dspace.date.submission2021-02-07T04:23:41Z
mit.journal.volume40en_US
mit.licensePUBLISHER_POLICY


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record