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 | |
| State | Published - 1 Jan 2004 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'In defence of a Dogma: Davidson, languages, and conceptual schemes'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver