Talk:Significs

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Philosophy of language task force.

Philosophy: Language

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of language

The "Signifische Kring"

Latest comment: 14 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Constitutive meeting of the "Signifische Kring" was held in Bussum, Neatherlands, 21.5. 1922 according to its founding members Brouwer, van Eeden, Ginneken and Mannoury. This information is to be found from their dialogues published on journal Synthese (volume 2 from 1937). These dialogues are in three parts, all to be found within the same volume of the journal; pages 168-174, 261-268 and 316-324. Sadly, these dialogues are only available on Dutch and hence I won't even try to offer a translation as I am far from being a native speaker in either English or in Dutch. From what I gathered an early version of speech act theory is formulated on these dialogues as also supported by H. Walter Schmitz's article "Searle ist in Mode, Mannoury nicht" (1984) in Zeitschrift für Semiotik, Band 6: 445-463 (originally stumbled to this article thanks to Pietarinen pointing it out on an article from 2006). Schmitz also provides a German translation (p. 448) for the opening words of these dialogues which, for Dutch looks something like this: "De beteekenis van een taaldaad voor spreker en hoorder kan slechts voor een deel beoordeeld worden naar de daarbij gebezigde woorden of symbolen en is niet dan bii benadering in andere woorden uit te drukken." (From page 168 of aforementioned Synthese volume 2)

As I don't feel comfortable modifying the entry due to my somewhat slotty grammar, I will leave these remarks here for the discussion and for those better versed in writing to possibly update in the actual article. (--78.27.78.126 (talk) 16:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC))Reply

Hi, thanks for sharing. As a start I removed two of the links that gave contradicting info. If you want to add some more please be our guest. -- Mdd (talk) 23:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Add topic