Philosophy of Modern Language

Donald Davidson (1926–2003) builds on Quine's project, developing his own interpretationist theory of language. Davidson argues that truth is the fundamental semantic notion and that meaning is given by specifying the truth conditions for a sentence. This specification can only be achieved by a method of radical interpretation, which requires treating the speaker as holding mostly true beliefs. This approach differs from the representationalist picture in the following ways: Reference is not the fundamental semantic relation between language and the world, but a derivative relation; meaning and belief are interdependent—there is no way to separate them in a principled fashion; the method of radical interpretation requires, as a normative constraint, that the speaker be rational.

The 1990s brought a defense of inferentialist theories of meaning against representationalist theories. On an inferentialist view, the meaning of a sentence is a matter of the inferential relations that acceptance incurs. Instead of thinking of a sentence as representing a state of affairs, we should think of the sentence as entitling and committing the utterer to say and believe other things. To assert "Horses are mammals" is thereby to be committed to holding true "Horses are warm-blooded" and to rejecting as false "Horses lay eggs."

New theories of reference.

The second reaction to Quine was the construction of new theories of reference that are held to avoid the problems of the simple denotational theory. These are causal theories of reference and "direct reference" theories. Causal theories of reference identify the reference relation between words and properties with causal relations. Direct reference theories state that the object or property referred to just is the meaning of the expression; the reference relation is not explained by way of ostensive definition or some special causal chain. Both approaches free the notion of reference from necessarily involving some kind of mental act. Saul Kripke introduced key elements of both theories in his highly influential book Naming and Necessity (1972). There he maintains that referring terms "rigidly designate" their objects. Once an object has been baptized, that name denotes its object in any possible world in which the object (is specified to) occur(s). What secures the link for those who have no direct relation to the object is the socially transmitted causal chain that extends from the baptism to subsequent uses of the name. Kripke extended his theory of rigid designation and socially sustained causal chains to natural kinds as well as individuals.

Realism vs. Anti-Realism.

This debate concerning the nature of reference and whether it can explain the meaningfulness of language is at the heart of a philosophical debate that dominated the 1980s and continues to be felt. In the 1980s, the great metaphysical debate between realism and idealism was recast in terms of the relation between language and the world. This debate concerns both how reference and truth should be understood and whether the correct theory of meaning for language is a truth-conditional theory or an assertability conditional theory. A truth-conditional theory holds that the meaning of a sentence just is the truth condition for that sentence. An assertability conditional theory of meaning states that the meaning of a sentence is given by its assertability conditions, namely, the conditions by which one can recognize the statement is true. These are distinct versions of the representationalist picture of language. This debate became focused on vying theories of truth. Michael Dummett, the leading defender of the assertability conditional account, characterized the difference between realist and antirealist positions in terms of whether a statement could be meaningful and yet transcend any possible evidence for its truth or falsity.

This interest in truth as a semantic value has generated a lively debate. Both the realist and the antirealist hold substantive theories of truth. The realist identifies the truth of a sentence with its corresponding to the facts. The antirealist assesses truth in terms of coherence with other sentences and our recognitional capacities. Challenging both of these positions are "deflationary" theories of truth. Such theories deny that truth has a substantive nature (whether correspondence or coherence). The truth predicate is a device for semantic ascent, for moving from the sentence "snow is white" to the sentence "the sentence 'snow is white' is true." There are things that one can say by talking about sentences that are not easily said in other ways.

Other issues.

The 1990s saw a number of developments. Most important was the debate between inferentialist theories of language and representationalist theories. Other important issues concerned the nature of "vague" predicates like "bald" that have fuzzy borders (is the "fuzziness" a feature of the property itself or our ignorance?), the compositionality of meaning (is it essential to the explanation of meaning?), innate rules of grammar, and the infinite reach of language. Many of these issues have become highly technical and specialized, but they are all in the service of the great debates about the general character of language and meaning.