A Critique of the Empirical Interpretation of Language

DOI

10.2991/assehr.k.201215.469How to use a DOI?

Keywords

linguistic phenomenon, EIL, fictional names, universal terms

Abstract

In this paper, I argue that the empirical interpretation of language (EIL hereafter) in 17th century is inadequate. According to empiricists, ex., Hobbes and Locke, all languages are records of thoughts or ideas, which thus correspond to our experience of external objects. However, I argue that this theory is not completely satisfactory since it cannot explain many existent linguistic phenomena. I shall illustrate my point in three aspects: first, the structural varieties among different languages; second, the influence of language on our experience and cognition; third, the origin of certain words, such as fictional names and universal terms. Consequently, without explanation of those linguistic phenomena, EIL cannot be a solid and complete interpretation of language.

Copyright

© 2020, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press.

Open Access

This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Shuyin Jin
PY  - 2020
DA  - 2020/12/17
TI  - A Critique of the Empirical Interpretation of Language
BT  - Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Literature, Art and Human Development (ICLAHD 2020)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 423
EP  - 426
SN  - 2352-5398
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201215.469
DO  - 10.2991/assehr.k.201215.469
ID  - Jin2020
ER  -