Abstract
The chapter begins with a presentation of the historical background of the Directival Theory of Meaning. Next, I present the theory in its original form devised by Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz in the 1930s. The presentation of the theory uses a modernized language and examples but remains as close to the source as possible.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
As we are going to see in Chap. 6, this description is not completely misleading as it connects the DTM with modern similar accounts, such as Robert Brandom’s inferentialism.
- 2.
This form of interplay between epistemology and semantics is not something unusual in philosophy and is in fact very reminiscent of Quine’s account that we are going to compare to the DTM in Chap. 3.
- 3.
This is one of the examples used by Ajdukiewicz in the 1931 paper.
- 4.
It should thus not come as a surprise that the theory can be understood as the first example of a functional role semantics , as the same can be said about many theories of this type.
- 5.
Needless to say, I am not trying to say that this definition is correct.
- 6.
Although the DTM does refer to the notion of intentionality, using such a specific example is risky as it may give the impression that the lack of intentionality is somehow important for the DTM. See Klein (2007) for a good overview of the problem of intentionality of pain.
- 7.
This example is a modified version of Ajdukiewicz’s original example. I decided to alter it because the original was presented using outdated language.
- 8.
Understood as: “the user is expected to accept P(a) (without further reservations on the situation she is in)” and so on.
- 9.
Understood as: “if the user accepts the sentence P(a), she is expected to accept the sentence Q(b).
- 10.
You might be surprised that given the existence of axiomatic directive 2 and inferential directive 2, the sentence Q(c) isn’t an axiomatic directive either. After all, it is a consequence of these directives taken together. The point of this example is to show that some of the consequences of language rules are not themselves language rules and may thus be overlooked by the language user. We discuss this aspect of the DTM in Chap. 2.
- 11.
Understood as: “when the user experiences α, she should confirm the sentence Z” and so on.
- 12.
Ajdukiewicz uses a simple array. I believe that using a table is a much better visual way of explaining the idea. This will be especially important for us as it enables us to take the next step in creating an expressionless matrix (Table 1.3).
- 13.
It is important to say that Ajdukiewicz does not use the idea of an expressionless language matrix . I use this type of matrix to emphasize his idea that all that counts when it comes to the meaning of an expression is its placement in the structure of all other expressions in the directives.
- 14.
Note that the fact that the first coloured block in a given line represents a compound expression and all of the blocks that follow it represent its decomposition is given to us by the convention used to build the table.
- 15.
As mentioned in the Preface, this idea can be seen as a predecessor of the notion of “conceptual framework”.
- 16.
Or to take the same vocabulary and map it differently, creating a language that is similar only on a superficial level.
- 17.
The only similar approach can be found in Carnap (1934).
- 18.
Not to be mistaken with the order of expressions in a directive that is fixed. What I mean by saying that the order of directives in the scope is not important is that the directives themselves (the whole rows in the language matrix ) could be reshuffled. What matters is the sum of directives.
References
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1931/1978). On the meaning of expressions. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1934a/1978). Language and meaning. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1934b). Sprache und Sinn. Erkenntnis, 4(1), 100–138.
Ajdukiewicz K. (1934c/1978). The world-picture and the conceptual apparatus. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1935/1978). The scientific world-perspective. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1953/1985). W sprawie artykułu prof. A. Schaffa o moich poglądach filozoficznych. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), Język i poznanie (pp. 155–191). Warszawa: PWN.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1964/1978). The problem of empiricism and the concept of meaning. In K. Ajdukiewicz (Ed.), The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1978). The scientific world-perspective and other essays. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Ajdukiewicz, K. (1995). My philosophical ideas. In V. Sinisi & J. Woleński (Eds.), The heritage of Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz (Poznań studies in the philosophy of sciences and the humanities) (Vol. 40). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Block, N. (2003). Mental paint. In M. Hahn & B. Ramberg (Eds.), Reflections and replies: Essays on the philosophy of Tyler Burge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Buszkowski, W. (2010). O równoznaczności wyrażeń w ujęciu Ajdukiewicza. In J. Grad, J. Sójka, & A. Zaporowski (Eds.), Nauka − Kultura − Społeczeństwo. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesor Krystynie Zamiarze. Poznań: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza.
Carnap, R. (1934). Logische Syntax der Sprache. Wien: Verlag von Julius Springer.
Carroll, L. (1895). What the tortoise said to Achilles. Mind, 104(416), 691–693.
Chomsky, N. (1995). Language and nature. Mind, 104(413), 1–61.
Godart-Wendling, B. (2014). Looking for a semantic theory: The path taken by Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz (1931−1960). In V. B. Kasevitch (Ed.), History of linguistics 2011: Selected papers from the 12th international conference on the history of the language sciences (ICHOLS XII), Saint-Petersburg, 28 August − 2 September 2011. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hanusek, J. (2012). Argument Tarskiego i teorie znaczenia Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza. Diametros, 32, 160–189.
Jedynak, A. (1993). Conventionalism in Ajdukiewicz. In F. Coniglione, R. Poli, & J. Woleński (Eds.), Polish scientific philosophy. Rodopi: The Lvov-Warsaw School.
Klein, C. (2007). An imperative theory of pain. The Journal of Philosophy, 104(10), 517–532.
Maciaszek, J. (2007). Holizm Znaczeniowy Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza. Lodz: WSHE.
Nowaczyk, A. (2006). Dyrektywalna teoria znaczenia, czyli dramat Filozofa. In J. Pelc (Ed.), Sens, prawda, wartość: filozofia języka i nauki w dziełach Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza, Witolda Doroszewskiego, Tadeusza i Janiny Kotarbińskich, Romana Suszki, Władysława Tatarkiewicza. Warsaw: Biblioteka Myśli Semiotycznej.
Olech, A. (2015). Ajdukiewicz and Husserl on the issue of the meaning of expressions. Studia Semiotyczne − English Supplement, XXIV, 130–154.
Woleński, J. (2016). Ajdukiewicz on analyticity. Studies in East European Thought, 68(1), 5–10.
Wójcicki, R. (1999). Ajdukiewicz. Teoria znaczenia. Warsaw: Prószyński i S-ka.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Grabarczyk, P. (2019). The Directival Theory of Meaning. In: Directival Theory of Meaning. Synthese Library, vol 409. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18783-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18783-5_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-18781-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-18783-5
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)