|Conventions: Conventions are agreements on approval and disapproval of actions that may have been made explicitly once, but have evolved over time to a more or less unconscious basis for the coordinated action of most members of a group or society. These conventions, on the other hand, lead to the expectation of certain consequences of actions._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Books on Amazon
Convention/Lewis: more than mere behavior regularity - no agreement necessary - not even implied agreement - 170 conventional meaning is more than the usual meaning, because it contains common knowledge about a regularity
Convention/Lewis: mutual knowledge - Cargile: useful only up to fourth reflection - Lewis: only actions are coordinated - BennettVsLewis: do not imparting any action on a meaning
Searle: no "conventional meaning" instead: rules that apply for an expression
Convention/Meaning/Bennett: a speaker can only ever give an expression a conventional meaning if it already has a meaning - (>Lemon example) - Wittgenstein: I cannot say "hot" while I mean "cold" - SearleVsWittgenstein: the meaning exceeds the intention, it is sometimes also a matter of convention - Bennett: conventional meaning effective circumstance_____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
I Bennett Die Strategie des Bedeutungs-Nominalismus aus Meggle (Hrsg) Handlung, Kommunikation, Bedeutung, Frankf/M 1979