Aristotle’s theory of language is studied with regard to the possibility of saying what does not exist, either because one can express falsity, or because one can truthfully speak of nonexistent. According to Aristotle, symbol and sign are not the same: the symbol is a kind of sign, an articulated linguistic sign. Convention is, in a formal sense, the relation of significance from the meaning to the sign, in a material sense, it is the result of the Agreement between our experience of the world and the world itself. The relationship that links thought to things cannot be similarity, because if the object is not there, thought cannot look like anything, it should rather be a relation of representation. Πράγματα include entities, but do not exclude non-entities. Taking the example of τραγέλαφος, it may be argued that μὴ ὄντα are both extra-mental and different from absolute nothing.
Language, thought and world in Aristotle. De Interpretatione 1 in the light of pseudomorphia
Raspa Venanzio
2018
Abstract
Aristotle’s theory of language is studied with regard to the possibility of saying what does not exist, either because one can express falsity, or because one can truthfully speak of nonexistent. According to Aristotle, symbol and sign are not the same: the symbol is a kind of sign, an articulated linguistic sign. Convention is, in a formal sense, the relation of significance from the meaning to the sign, in a material sense, it is the result of the Agreement between our experience of the world and the world itself. The relationship that links thought to things cannot be similarity, because if the object is not there, thought cannot look like anything, it should rather be a relation of representation. Πράγματα include entities, but do not exclude non-entities. Taking the example of τραγέλαφος, it may be argued that μὴ ὄντα are both extra-mental and different from absolute nothing.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
