home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky sci.cognitive:658 sci.philosophy.tech:4146 sci.lang:8076
- Newsgroups: sci.cognitive,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.lang
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!pacbell.com!sgiblab!munnari.oz.au!newsroom.utas.edu.au!tasman.cc.utas.edu.au!peeters
- From: peeters@tasman.cc.utas.edu.au (bert peeters)
- Subject: Re:synonymy
- Message-ID: <peeters.722042096@tasman>
- Sender: news@newsroom.utas.edu.au
- Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
- References: <28179@castle.ed.ac.uk> <1992Nov15.172021.17474@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Nov16.000040.19912@midway.uchicago.edu> <1992Nov16.120727.17500@husc3.harvard.edu> <1992Nov17.092016.28202@news.unige.ch>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 23:14:56 GMT
- Lines: 26
-
- swann@divsun.unige.ch (SWANN Philip) writes:
-
- >I would object to the assumption that synonymy is a property of
- >human language. Trivially, if we believe that two expressions
- >"mean the same thing" then we have some meaningful criteria to
- >distinguish them and some reason for doing so and, unless you want
- >to multiply abstract entities endlessly, they therefore do not "mean
- >the same thing". More concretely, for any pair of human language
- >expressions that you claim to be synonymous in a given context, I
- >claim that I can produce another context in which they are not
- >synonymous. Finally, while genuine synonymes *might* exist as
- >transient phenomena in human language, surely one would quickly
- >be driven out by the other for simple reasons of efficiency (would
- >you want to keep two identical copies of the same procedure in
- >a program?).
-
- I absolutely agree with this statement (whether it is (part of) a
- theory of meaning or not :-)...).
-
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
- Dr Bert Peeters Tel: +61 02 202344
- Department of Modern Languages 002 202344
- University of Tasmania at Hobart Fax: 002 207813
- GPO Box 252C Bert.Peeters@modlang.utas.edu.au
- Hobart TAS 7001
- Australia
-