Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature
My major aim in this paper is to discuss whether the property of recursion provides a good explanation of human specificity. In so doing, I will analyze two approaches to the study of natural language: the computational and the anthropological conceptions. The main conclusion of this work is twofold...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Universidad del Valle
2018-02-01
|
| Series: | Praxis Filosófica |
| Online Access: | http://praxis.univalle.edu.co/index.php/praxis/article/view/6154 |
| id |
doaj-9f9725594c4f47a48ff8ca30a8256be9 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
Article |
| spelling |
doaj-9f9725594c4f47a48ff8ca30a8256be92020-11-25T00:32:03ZdeuUniversidad del VallePraxis Filosófica0120-46882389-93872018-02-014612514910.25100/pfilosofica.v0i46.61546154Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human natureSergio Mota0Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, EspañaMy major aim in this paper is to discuss whether the property of recursion provides a good explanation of human specificity. In so doing, I will analyze two approaches to the study of natural language: the computational and the anthropological conceptions. The main conclusion of this work is twofold. On the one hand, I argue that recursion is not a good explanation of human essence. On the other hand, what is, indeed, specifically human is the construction of a mythology with a metaphysical slant, in this particular case, in the guise of the language of science.http://praxis.univalle.edu.co/index.php/praxis/article/view/6154 |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
deu |
| format |
Article |
| sources |
DOAJ |
| author |
Sergio Mota |
| spellingShingle |
Sergio Mota Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature Praxis Filosófica |
| author_facet |
Sergio Mota |
| author_sort |
Sergio Mota |
| title |
Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| title_short |
Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| title_full |
Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| title_fullStr |
Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Two conceptions of language: Wittgenstein and Chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| title_sort |
two conceptions of language: wittgenstein and chomsky on recursion as a “good” explanation of human nature |
| publisher |
Universidad del Valle |
| series |
Praxis Filosófica |
| issn |
0120-4688 2389-9387 |
| publishDate |
2018-02-01 |
| description |
My major aim in this paper is to discuss whether the property of recursion provides a good explanation of human specificity. In so doing, I will analyze two approaches to the study of natural language: the computational and the anthropological conceptions. The main conclusion of this work is twofold. On the one hand, I argue that recursion is not a good explanation of human essence. On the other hand, what is, indeed, specifically human is the construction of a mythology with a metaphysical slant, in this particular case, in the guise of the language of science. |
| url |
http://praxis.univalle.edu.co/index.php/praxis/article/view/6154 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT sergiomota twoconceptionsoflanguagewittgensteinandchomskyonrecursionasagoodexplanationofhumannature |
| _version_ |
1725321188290330624 |