Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T01:23:51.598Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reid on the priority of natural language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

John Turri
John Turri*
Affiliation:
Philosophy Department, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, ON, N2L3G1, Canada
*
*Email: john.turri@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thomas Reid distinguished between natural and artificial language and argued that natural language has a very specific sort of priority over artificial language. This paper critically interprets Reid's discussion, extracts a Reidian explanatory argument for the priority of natural language, and places Reid's thought in the broad tradition of Cartesian linguistics.

Keywords

Thomas ReidNoam Chomskyartificial signsnatural signsartificial languagenatural language
Type
Mind, Language, Metaphysics
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 41 , Issue S1: New Essays on Reid , July 2011 , pp. 214 - 223
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Castagnetto, Susan 1992. “Reid's answer to abstract ideas.” Journal of philosophical research 17: 39–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1957. Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1966. Cartesian linguistics: a chapter in the history of rationalist thought. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Cuneo, Terrence and Woudenberg, Rene van eds. 2004. The Cambridge companion to Thomas Reid. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1957. “Meaning.” The Philosophical Review 66 (3): 377–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1969. “Utterer's meaning and intention.” The Philosophical Review 78 (2): 147–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Immerwahr, John 1978. “The development of Reid's realism.” The Monist 61: 245–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, Henning 1979. “Reid and Wittgenstein on philosophy and language.” Philosophical studies 36: 359–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, Lex ed. 2007. The Cambridge companion to Locke's “essay concerning human understanding”. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, Thomas 1764 [1997]. An inquiry into the human mind on the principles of common sense, edited by Brookes, Derek R. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winkler, Kenneth P. ed. 2005. The Cambridge companion to Berkeley. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar