Abstract
AbstractIn this paper, I analyze the concept of ineffability: what does it mean to say that something cannot be said? I begin by distinguishing ineffability from paradox: if something cannot be said truly or without contradiction, this is not an instance of ineffability. Next, I distinguish two different meanings of ‘saying something’ which result from a fundamental ambiguity in the term ‘language’, viz. language as a system of symbols and language as a medium of communication. Accordingly, ‘ineffability’ is ambiguous, too, and we should make a distinction between weak and strong ineffability. Weak ineffability is rooted in the deficiencies of a particular language while strong ineffability stems from the structure of a particular cognitive system and its capacities for conceptual mental representation. Mental contents are only sayable if we are able to conceptualize them and then create signs to represent them in communication.
Funder
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference30 articles.
1. Alston, W. (1956). Ineffability. Philosophical Review, 65, 506–522.
2. Aristotle (1963). Categories and De Interpretatione. Trans. by J.L. Ackrill, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Bennett-Hunter, G. (2014). Ineffability and religious experience. London: Pickering and Chatto.
4. Carnap, R. (1937). Logical syntax of language. London: Routledge.
5. Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献