In defence of a Dogma: Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes

Isaac Nevo

doi:10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x

In defence of a Dogma: Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes

Isaac Nevo

Department of Philosophy

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

In this paper I draw on Davidson's work to generate counter examples to his claim that since there are no untranslatable languages there are also no alternative conceptual schemes. I argue that Davidson's argument to that effect is based upon an equivocation.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	312-328
Number of pages	17
Journal	Ratio
Volume	17
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x
State	Published - 1 Jan 2004

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Philosophy

Access to Document

10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x

Cite this

@article{ccd1e02576b4447aae9c9d24a7891995,

title = "In defence of a Dogma: Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes",

abstract = "In this paper I draw on Davidson's work to generate counter examples to his claim that since there are no untranslatable languages there are also no alternative conceptual schemes. I argue that Davidson's argument to that effect is based upon an equivocation.",

author = "Isaac Nevo",

year = "2004",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x",

language = "English",

volume = "17",

pages = "312--328",

journal = "Ratio",

issn = "0034-0006",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - In defence of a Dogma

T2 - Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes

AU - Nevo, Isaac

PY - 2004/1/1

Y1 - 2004/1/1

N2 - In this paper I draw on Davidson's work to generate counter examples to his claim that since there are no untranslatable languages there are also no alternative conceptual schemes. I argue that Davidson's argument to that effect is based upon an equivocation.

AB - In this paper I draw on Davidson's work to generate counter examples to his claim that since there are no untranslatable languages there are also no alternative conceptual schemes. I argue that Davidson's argument to that effect is based upon an equivocation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34248704205&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x

DO - 10.1111/j.0034-0006.2004.00256.x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:34248704205

SN - 0034-0006

VL - 17

SP - 312

EP - 328

JO - Ratio

JF - Ratio

IS - 3

ER -

In defence of a Dogma: Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this