Customer Reviews

Philosophy of Language: A Contemporary Introduction (Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I haven't touched the philosophy of language for 20 years, so it was nice to pick up a text that gets you right back into this interesting subject. To appreciate the philosophy of language you have to be amazed that we can make noises or marks to others that carry meaning and elicit the variety of responses that take place in human social interaction. Lycan brings you right into the heart of this phenomenon and brings out all the important ideas and counter ideas in lively and occasionally funny prose. Most importantly, he makes the topic readily undertandable and interesting.

Beyond the topic of "meaning", Lycan surveys speech acts, metaphors, etc. I think it will give the interested reader a pretty good grasp of the central issues in the field. The introductory summaries for each section and the study questions and tips for further reading make this a great book for the student or interested nonstudent (like me).

If you are perplexed at how the philosophy of language can be fun and interesting, this is the book for you.

this book has several things going for it:
first, it is an informative and brief, yet thorough, introduction to some central issues in the philosophy of language. for each issue, lycan summarizes the problems to be solved, explains some theories with which prominent philosophers have attempted to solve them, and provides possible objections and replies to those theories. lycan links each issue smoothly with the next, so that the reader sees clearly how the different problems in the field are related.
second, the reader is provided with chapter introductions, chapter summaries, review questions, and a long bibliography.
third, lycan makes his text entertaining with some great sarcasm, and by creating humorous (yet effective) examples. i actually laughed out loud several times while reading this text.

overall, this is a great book. i highly recommend it to beginners in the philosophy of language.

I just want to echo the other reviewers. This is a wonderful introductory text. I am a law professor who is interested in learning more about philosophy of language. This was the first book I read, and it fit the bill wonderfully. It provides a nice overview of major debates in the field. And it is accessible, logically structured, and fun to read. It certainly warrants five stars. I hasten to add that I do not know (and have never met) the author of this book (I believe such disclaimers are necessary when reviewing books on amazon).

This is THE book for beginners to have. It's a rare philosopher who knows what the word "introduction" means in a book title; most seem to write so-called introductory books as though the audience is professional philosophers.

Finally I have some idea what Russell, Frege, Strawson, Donnellan and others were trying to say. And I know why it is not the case that the present king of France is bald.

If you are going to understand contemporary philosophy, you have to understand the philosophy of language. Prof. Lycan's book is an excellent introduction. First, it is very clearly written and, second, it avoids excessive use of logical symbolism. My only complaints are that there could have been a longer discussion of Frege and more discussion of how questions raised impact other areas of philosophy such as metaphysics and religion. However, Prof. Lycan tells us that these matters will be taken up in the other works in the Routledge Contemporary Introduction to Philosophy series.

Philosophy of Language by William Lycan is an instalment in the Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy Series. This series is intended to provide a bridge between introductory and advanced study, primarily aimed at students/readers with some prior exposure to academic philosophy.

Overall, this is a solid addition to the contemporary introductions series. Philosophy of language can be an arcane and jargon-laden field. Lycan's methodology is generally helpful, introducing many of the key thinkers, and concepts, in the modern philosophy of language tradition (e.g. Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein, etc.) The approach employed in the text is to introduce a philosopher's key thoughts then consider objections and potential retorts. This is not a bad tactic, however, from my perspective greater focus on a few key points would be preferable to the current emphasis on breadth (some of the points are too trivial or technical for an introductory text). Each section is followed by a summary of key points, questions for discussion and suggestions for further reading. Additionally, from a physical standpoint the paper back version is well constructed and has a usable font size.

Strengths aside, two stylistic weaknesses reduced my enjoyment of the text and its ultimate utility. The more trivial is the author's excessive self-reference, e.g. "your humble narrator", "you were expecting me to recommend someone else {referring to himself)?" etc. I think that this may have been done with the intention of adding levity to an otherwise dense and potentially dry subject. It was, however, over done and distracting; most of these comments should be removed. The second, and more significant, weakness is style. There is academic writing that is pleasant and flowing, and then there is writing that is laborious and plodding. Unfortunately, this text is in the latter category- even being familiar with the material I found myself constantly having to re-read sections in order to get the point. I fear that if used as a textbook it may turn students off this field.

Upon reflection, I realize that my muted reaction to the book has two components; how the topic is approached and articulated (discussed above), and the subject itself. On this latter point, though intellectually interesting in its own right, much later-day work in this field by Searle, Grice, Davidson, et al, strikes me as adding little real value. Their type of logical-linguistic minutia, though fascinating in its own way, seems analogous to some of the worst medieval theological musings. To progress, it appears that the analytical tradition may need to blend with the behavioural sciences and consider communication from a broader perspective.

Overall, a solid if dry piece of academic writing. A background in analytic philosophy may be required to fully engage with, and integrate, this material. Although, I do not have a ready recommendation there are likely better introductory texts available.

I bought this text as an introduction the philosophy of language. As the title suggests, it is just that. However, I am somewhat familar with the other books in this series, and they do not exactly "hold one's hand," as it were in the presentation of views on their topics; I felt as though Lycan was doing just that. Many of the debates that he discusses in this book are given a quite superficial treatment. He shies away from any engagement with the issues of logical form (and almost any use of symbolic logic at all); important distinctions such as extensionality/intensionality go unmentioned, and the organization--especially of the first section--is somewhat baffling, as some reviewers have already pointed out; and the central importance of demonstratives, for example, is just barely gestured at. What this book does have going for it, however, is the "further reading" sections at the end of each chapter and the concise "objection/response" sections in the theories of meaning section. However, this does not exactly set this book apart; Miller's "Philosophy of Language" has even more extensive "further reading" sections, a discernable theme (rather than Lycan's "dumptruck method" of exposition), and more substanative engagement with the issues.
The only situation in which one might wish to use this book, in my opinion, is for an introduction to philosophy class that focuses on philosophy of language, or perhaps as "summer" or "winter break" reading *before* the class is to begin. In this sense, Lycan is successful in his aim of writing an "introductory" text, so it merits at least three stars, I suppose.

Do not buy this book if you are unfamiliar with the topic of "philosophy of language". In my opinion, this book kind of sucks. For one, in chapter 2 the author starts discussing Russell's views (from On Denoting) on Frege's ideas, and then in chapter 3 discusses Frege's views. Personally, I found this to be very annoying, especially since Frege's views and ideas started much of the debate the "philosophy of language". It does not make any sense, in terms of organization, when you start the discussion in the middle of the debate, which I feel this book basically does.
The book may be concise and raise the main points, but that does not mean that the book is well written, or gives the topic a credible and understandable foundation. This is especially important when we are talking about a subject like the philosophy of language. I mean, the subject itself is very complicated (e.g. how can we discuss a topic, like language, when we are using language to figure the topic out; think about it for a minute). Anyways, I just feel that this book makes the topic more complicated than it needs to be, and most people who pick up this book will probably read some of it and feel bewildered by the subject matter (which although complicated does not mean that it is something most people cannot understand and think about).
If you are looking for better books, check out "The Game of the Name", by Gregory McCulloch, or "Philosopy of Language", by Alexander Miller. McCulloch's book is very straitforward, and he makes his points and ideas clear throughout. Miller's book is very readible and is a very good introduction for anyone interested in the topic (for one, he actually introduces the logical terminology at the beginning and gives a very simple and readable overview of logical notation).

Lambent survey of philosophy of language.

More concrete and easier to understand than most I've seen. I think this is a useful and very clear introduction to the concepts. As with many philosophical treatments, of the form "is A a B", it's rarely clear to me what has been resolved when there is no clear definition of "B" here or test for whether the right answer is found. For example, whether a name can refer to a non-existent, and whether James Moriarty "exists" are the kinds of questions that I fail to see can be resolved, as they depend on what one means by "exists".

But within these constraints, it's an excellent survey and I highly recommend the book.

for a book about language by such a big publisher (Routledge) to be so full of spelling mistakes is ... bizarre. I am at 5% and counted already: "sufciently", "refections", "exemplifes", "fgures out" ...
I wish there were a way to automatically return Kindle books delivered in such bad quality.