Experimental Pragmatics in Linguistics and Philosophy

Phelan, Mark

doi:10.1002/9781118661666.ch27

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, we at least observed intra ‐linguistic differences between Truth predicates (both in English and Japanese), and even between different truth predicates (“hontou” and “shin”), as well as cross‐linguistic differences in the use of Truth predicates between English and Japanese with huge effect sizes (thus, even if the difference was wholly pragmatic, this is an independently interesting cultural‐psychological discovery). Whether the effect was semantic or pragmatic is a matter for future investigation (to be conducted, perhaps, along the lines of studies discussed in Phelan, 2016). For now, we only report the strong effect of moral‐political factors on the behaviour of Japanese Truth predicates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…After we excluded the responses of participants who met the same criteria as the previous study or had participated in the previous study (there were no non-native Japanese speakers in the participants), we ended up with 91 participants (originally 110) for "hontou" (age M = 39.4, 35 For discussions of this kind of worry in the data of experimental philosophy in general, see Kauppinen (2007), Cullen (2009) and Phelan (2016).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A prolegomenon to the empirical cross‐linguistic study of truth

Mizumoto

2022

Theoria

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we propose and justify the cross-linguistic study of the concept of truth through empirical studies of truth predicates, with results of such studies. We first conceptually explore the possibility of cross-linguistic disagreement about truth purely due to linguistic norms governing truth predicates, which may imply a kind of pluralism about the concept of truth. We then consider the conditions under which we would be justified in inferring this sort of pluralism from the fact of such cross-linguistic disagreement. Next, we report results of three studies on the use of English "is true" and Japanese two truth predicates, as well as "is correct" and its Japanese counterpart. We then report another set of studies using a different vignette, where the radical cross-linguistic difference observed in earlier studies disappeared. These data together suggest that the moral-political factor in the truth-bearer (utterance) strongly affects the uses of Japanese truth predicates but not those of English. Finally, we will discuss the implications of the studies and results reported here, and the empirical possibility of what we call lexical alethic pluralism, for debates over relativism, theories of meaning, and the deflationary and inflationary theories of truth.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%