Skip to content

LINGUISTIC MEANING MEETS LINGUISTIC FORM IN ACTION

Nara Miranda de Figueiredo, Elena Clare Cuffari

Manuscrito March 22, 2022 DOI: 10.1590/0100-6045.2022.v45n1.ne (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Keywords Sign-based semantics Enactivism Language Cognitive archeology
Citations 4
Key points Proposes that sign-based semantics can avoid relying on mental content by adopting an enactivist perspective that incorporates meaningful material engagement from cognitive archaeology.

Abstract

Abstract In this paper we suggest that Duffley’s sign-based semantics rests on two main claims: a methodological one and an ontological one. The methodological one is the analysis of corpora and the ontological one is the postulate of mental content. By adopting a linguistic enactivist perspective with a Wittgensteinian twist, we endorse Duffley’s methodological claim and suggest that a sign-based semantics doesn’t have to rely on mental content if it takes into account the conception of meaningful material engagement in cognitive archeology and its development into sign-using as an enactive capacity.