scholarly journals Chomsky’s London

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (62) ◽  
pp. 285-300
Author(s):  
Zoltán Vecsey

Semantic externalism is the view according to which proper names and other nominals have the capacity to refer to language-independent objects. On this view, the proper name ‘London’ is related semantically to a worldly object, London. Chomsky’s long held position is that this relational conception of reference is untenable. According to his internalist framework, semantics should be restricted to the examination of the informational features of I-language items. Externalists reject this restriction by saying that without employing the relational notion of reference, it would remain entirely mysterious how we can talk about our perceptible environment. This paper offers a novel argument for externalism. The basic idea is that external reference proves to be indispensable even for Chomskyans who regard our talk about the environment as irrelevant for the purposes of semantics.

Author(s):  
Olena Karpenko ◽  
Tetiana Stoianova

The article is devoted to the study of personal names from a cognitive point of view. The study is based on the cognitive concept that speech actually exists not in the speech, not in linguistic writings and dictionaries, but in consciousness, in the mental lexicon, in the language of the brain. The conditions for identifying personal names can encompass not only the context, encyclopedias, and reference books, but also the sound form of the word. In the communicative process, during a free associative experiment, which included a name and a recipient’s mental lexicon. The recipient was assigned a task to quickly give some association to the name. The aggregate of a certain number of reactions of different recipients forms the associative field of a proper name. The associative experiment creates the best conditions for identifying the lexeme. The definition of a monosemantic personal name primarily includes the search of what it denotes, while during the process of identifying a polysemantic personal name recipients tend have different reactions. Scientific value is posed by the effect of the choice of letters for the name, sound symbolism, etc. The following belong to the generalized forms of identification: usage of a hyperonym; synonyms and periphrases or simple descriptions; associations denoting the whole (name stimulus) by reference to its part (associatives); cognitive structures such as “stimulus — association” and “whole (stimulus) — part (associative)”; lack of adjacency; mysterious associations. The topicality of the study is determined by its perspective to identify the directions of associative identification of proper names, which is one of the branches of cognitive onomastics. The purpose of the study is to identify, review, and highlight the directions of associative identification of proper names; the object of the research is the names in their entirety and variety; its subject is the existence of names in the mental lexicon, which determines the need for singling out the directions for the associative identification of the personal names.


2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Grima

This paper focuses on the transposition from English into Maltese of the various proper names encountered in Frank McCourt’s memoir Angela’s Ashes (Chapter 1). To achieve this aim, an extended practical translation exercise by the author himself is used. Eight different categories of proper names were identified in the source-text ranging from common people names to nicknames, titles and forms of address. Four different categories of cross-cultural transposition of proper names were considered, although only two were actually used. Various translation strategies were adopted ranging from non-translation to modification, depending on whether the particular proper name has a ‘conventional’ meaning or a culturally ‘loaded’ meaning. Although cultural losses were unavoidable, cultural gains were also experienced. Wherever possible, the original proper names were preserved to avoid any change in meaning and interference in their functionality as cultural markers. Moreover, a semantic creative translation was preferred, especially with proper names that were culturally and semantically loaded to reduce the amount of processing effort required by the target-reader and to minimize the cultural losses of relevant contextual and cultural implications in the target-text.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Maximova ◽  
Tatiana Maykova

Proper names reflect the interaction between society and language. They identify unique entities and are used to refer to them. At the same time, it is not uncommon of proper names to serve as a source for word-formation. It should be noted, however, that while in a natural language (notably English) proper names mostly give rise to denominal verbs or adjectives, terminologies are different. Most units that count as terms are nouns, which makes their semantics somewhat special. The paper originates as one of a series towards a typology of sociological terminology and endeavors to analyze the terms whose etymology refers to a proper name (that is, eponymic terms). The research poses the following questions: whether this type of terms is common in Social Science, what are their structural and semantic distinctions as well as mechanisms behind their motivation, whether they are culture specific. The terms were manually retrieved from a set of data of 2500 terminological units extracted from a number of dictionaries and other sources. They were further grouped by structural criteria and the nature of eponymous components and made subject to morphological and semantic analyses. The research shows that structurally eponymic terms are morphological derivatives or two-(or more)-word compounds, with their prevalence estimated at 2%. The authors come to conclusion that terms of this type feature substantial diversity with regard to their eponymous components; they are motivated through the combination of encyclopedic knowledge of the entity, represented by the eponym, and the semantics of derivational morphemes or appellative components. Mythology-based eponymous terminology is represented by two groups, the first tracing back to Antiquity or biblical tradition, and the second of later origin, which requires a specific cultural experience for the meaning to be retrieved. Further analysis shows that the latter type along with toponym-based terminology is culture-specific in relation to American culture.


2004 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georges Kleiber

This study revisits the classic problem posed by the meaning of proper names, and proposes a procedural approach to this problem, by analysing the meaning of proper names as an instruction to find in long-term memory the referent that carries the proper name in question. This is a revision of my earlier theory of ‘naming predicates’ (Kleiber 1981), which captures the meaning of proper names like Louis in terms of paraphrases of the form “the x who is called Louis”. The concept of ‘naming predicate’ was meant to provide an alternative to the inadequacies of the two classic approaches to the meaning of proper names, viz. theories that analyse proper names as semantically empty (e.g. Mills, Kripke 1972) and theories that analyse proper names in terms of uniquely identifying descriptions (Frege, Russell 1956). An analysis in terms of naming predicates (‘the X called Louis’) gives proper names an abstract type of meaning, thus avoiding the disembodied sign that results from analysing them as semantically empty, and at the same time does not go to the other extreme of incoporating aspects of the referent in the proper name’s meaning, thus avoiding the well-known problems with referential identity (e.g. Tullius = Cicero) and the related puzzles of transparence and opacity. In spite of these descriptive advantages, further research has shown that there are a number of problems with the notion of ‘naming predicate’. One of these problems concerns the status of proper names in ‘naming constructions’ like I am called Louis. Applying a naming predicate analysis to such constructions either leads to infinite regression (Wilmet 1995), or — if Louis in the naming predicate ‘the x called Louis’ is regarded as a phonetic form rather than a proper name — to a denial of proper name status in the very construction that expresses the naming link between proper name and referent (Jonasson 1982). Another problem concerns the cognitive naturalness of an analysis in terms of ‘naming predicates’. While this analysis is quite natural in contexts like There is no Louis in this office, it works less well in contexts like This painting is a real Picasso and, most importantly, in prototypical uses like Louis is a painter and a sculpturer, where a naming predicate analysis solely identifies the referent as the carrier of the proper name. These problems have led me to propose a revision to the theory of naming predicates. The descriptive advantages of using the naming relation between proper name and referent as the basis of the semantic description are obvious, which means that this aspect of the theory needs to be maintained. What causes most of the problems, however, is associating this naming relation with a predicate. As an alternative, I propose to reanalyse it in a procedural sense, not as a predicate describing the referent but as a procedural instruction to look for the referent that carries the proper name. This puts proper names in the domain of indexical signs like deictic elements. Common nouns, on the other hand, are not indexical in this sense but stand for concepts, which means that indexicality only comes into the picture when deictic elements are added.


Author(s):  
David Sosa

For an expression to be rigid means (abstracting from some variations) that it refers to one and the same thing with respect to any possible situation. But how is this in turn to be understood? An example will help us work through the definition. Take a word like ‘Aristotle.’ That word is a proper name; and proper names are a clear case of a type of word that refers. ‘Aristotle’ refers to a particular person, the last great philosopher of antiquity; in general, a name refers to the thing of which it is the name. To continue working through the definition of rigidity, we need to make sense of referring with respect to. It is tempting, for example, but mistaken, to understand a word's referring with respect to a possible situation as it's being used, in that situation, to refer to something.


1999 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Willy Van Langendonck

This paper is intended to be an interdisciplinary investigation of the status of proper names, although it takes linguistics as its point of departure. In this study I will define proper names in terms of the currently developing Radical Construction Grammar, as promoted by Croft (to appear). Starting from the referential and semantic functions of proper names, I discuss the opposing theses of the language philosophers John Searle and Saul Kripke, and then formulate my position that proper names are assigned an ad hoc referent in an ad hoc name-giving act, i.e. not on the basis of a concept or predication as with common nouns. This ad hoc assignment can be repeated several times, so numerous people can be called John. Proper names do not have asserted lexical meaning but do display presuppositional meanings of several kinds: categorical (basic level), associative senses (introduced either via the name-bearer or via the name-form) and grammatical meanings. Language specifically, this referential and semantic status is reflected in the occurrence of proper names in certain constructions. I thus claim that close (or 'restrictive') appositional patterns of the form [definite article + noun + noun], e.g. the poet Burns, are relevant to the definition of proper names in English and also to the categorical (often basic level) meaning of the name. From proper names we can also derive nouns that appear as a special kind of common noun, e.g. another John. From a methodological viewpoint it is imperative to distinguish here between (proprial) lexemes or lemmas in isolation (dictionary entries) and proprial lemmas in their different functions (prototypically: proper name, nonprototypically: common noun or other). To corroborate the above theses, I will adduce recent psycholinguistic and especially neurolinguistic evidence. The overall argument will be based mainly on material from Germanic languages, especially English, Dutch and German.


Memory ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 329-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Valentine ◽  
Viv Moore ◽  
Brenda M. Flude ◽  
Andrew W. Young ◽  
Andrew W. Ellis

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 257 ◽  
Author(s):  
James L. Dolby

<p><span>Viable on-line search systems require reasonable capabilities to automatically detect (and hopefully correct) variations between request format and stored format. </span><span>An </span><span>important requirement is the solution of the problem </span><span>of </span><span>matching proper names, not only because both input specifications and storage specifications are subject to error, </span><span>but </span><span>also because various transliteration schemes </span><span>exist </span><span>and can provide variant proper name forms in the same data base. This paper reviews several proper name matching </span><span>schemes </span><span>and provides an updated version of these schemes which tests out nicely on the proper name equivalence classes of a suburban telephone book. </span><span>An </span><span>appendix lists the corpus </span><span>of </span><span>names used for algorithm test.</span></p>


Via Latgalica ◽  
2013 ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Antra Kļavinska

Proper names, including ethnonyms (folk, tribal and other ethnic community names), is an<br />essential component of any language lexis, which particularly brightly reveals a variety ofextralinguistic processes.<br />The aim of the paper is to analyze the conformity of ethnonym transonymization (the change of proper name class) and deonymization (the change of proper name into<br />appellative) in the culture of Latgale, and linguistic techniques and extralinguistic factors.<br />Linguo-culturological approach has been used in the research, and the link between cultural-<br />historical and social processes in the research of linguistic processes has been taken into<br />account. Determining the origin of ancient ethnonyms, the researchers of the Baltic languages<br />acknowledge a transonymization model typical to the Balts: hydronym → name of region<br />→ ethnonym (Zinkevičius 2005, 186–187). This paper attempts to reveal various ethnonym<br />(denoting mostly foreigners) transonymization models in the system of proper names of<br />Latgale, nominating motivation, and the types of word-formation.<br />It seems that the ethnonyms that denote the neighbouring nations (Estonians,<br />Lithuanians, Russians) most frequently turn into other proper names. Transonymization<br />models have been identifi ed as follows:<br />1) ethnonym → anthroponym → oikonym (or ethnonym → oikonym → anthroponym),<br />for example, l ī t a u n ī k i ‘the Lithuanians’ → L ī t a u n ī k s ‘a surname’ →<br />L ī t a u n ī k i ‘a village in Preiļi county’;<br />2) ethnonym → microtoponym, for example, ž y d i ‘the Jews’ → Ž y d a p ū r s<br />‘a marsh in Vārkava county’;<br />3) ethnonym → anthroponym, for example, č y g u o n i ‘the Roma people’ →<br />Č y g u o n s ‘a nickname for a dark-haired man’;<br />4) ethnonym (→ oikonym) → ergonym, for example, l a t g a ļ i ‘The Baltic tribe’ →<br />“L a t g a ļ i” ‘a farm in Mērdzene rural municipality of Kārsava county’.<br />Transonymization of ethnonyms in the culture of Latgale is motivated by historical<br />and social processes. Transonymization processes present the evidence of Latgalians’ stereotypical perception of foreigners, compact settlement of different ethnic groups in<br />Latgale, and historical events.<br />Various types of word-formation are used in the transonymization process:<br />1) semantic, i.e., only the meaning changes, the morphemic system of lexeme is notchanged, for example, ethnonym p o ļ a k i → oikonym P o ļ a k i (→ surname P o ļ a k s<br />(the male singular form of the ethnonym));<br />2) morphological, typically suffixes are added to ethnonyms (sometimes phonetic<br />changes in the root occur), for example, i g a u n i ‘the Estonians’ → surnames I k a u n ī k s<br />(ikaun-+-nīk-s); I g o v e n s (igov-+ - en-s);<br />3) syntactical, forming compound words, for example, the ethnonym k r ī v i<br />‘the Russians’ has motivated the oikonym K r ī v a s o l a &lt;Krīva sola ‘Russian Village’,<br />K r ī v m a i z e s &lt;Krīvu maizes ‘Russian bread’;<br />4) formation of analytical forms, where one of the components has ethnonymic<br />semantics and the second component is a nomenclature word (hill, meadow, marsh, lake,<br />etc.), for example, Ž y d a p ū r s ‘Jew’s marsh’, an attributive adjective, for example, a<br />village M a z i e L ī t a u n ī k i ‘small Lithuanians’, a substantive of other semantics, for<br />example, a meadow Č i g o n e i c a s j ū s t a ‘Gypsy’s belt’.<br />Proper names of foreign origin motivated by ethnonyms have taken their stable<br />place in the system of proper names of Latgale, for example, L a t i š i, a village in Pušmucova<br />rural municipality of Cibla civil-parish (in Russian латыши ‘the Latvians’).<br />Proper names of ethnonymic semantics, used to name various phenomena and<br />realities, are often included in the lexicon of various dialects of Latvian and even other<br />languages. If to assume the fact that ethnonyms are proper names, then it can be concluded<br />that the appellatives mentioned above have appeared in deonymization process: ethnonym<br />→ appellative. Moreover, the material of Latgalian dialects confirms the existence of deethnonymic<br />proper names, for example, a lot of different realities are associated with the<br />ethnonyms denoting Roma people: č y g u o n i ‘participants of masquerade parade’;<br />č y g o n k a 1) a sort of winter apples, the apple of this sort (dark green and red); 2) the railroad;<br />3) achimenes (flower, Achimenes); 4) mushrooms: wild champignon (Rozites caperata) or<br />ugly milkcap (Lactarius necator); č y g u o n a s a u l e ‘the moon’. Appellativeness of<br />ethnonyms has an associative character. The names are reflecting the Latgalians’ stereotypical<br />perception of appearance, occupation, character traits, and traditions of foreigners as alien<br />and different, however, acceptable and assimilable phenomena.


1976 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne C. Minas

Yes, Aristotle was named ‘Aristotle’. I want to show that since ‘Aristotle’ is a proper name, this is true by definition. My theory of proper names is a version of Russell's, a theory that a name is equivalent in meaning to definite description(s) which single out the individual, if there is one, to which the name refers. (“When I say,e.g. ‘Homer existed’, I am meaning by ‘Homer’ some description, say ‘the author of the Homeric poems’ .”) Braithwaite at one time said that the proper name ‘Aristotle’ meant the description ‘the individual named “Aristotle” ’. This theory, which makes it contradictory to suppose that Aristotle was not (the individual) named ‘Aristotle’ I will argue is the correct one. This will involve some explanation of what naming is, which I will carry out in the first two sections. My contention is that naming is an activity that can be done either explicitly or non-explicitly. And names can be conferred either (a) on the basis of acquaintance or (b) by associating the name with descriptions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document