In light of this article:

Mondal, Prakash. "Towards a unified representation of linguistic meaning" Open Linguistics, vol. 9, no. 1, 2023, pp. 20220225. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-022

Section 4 presents the author’s suggested system that unifies disparate aspects of semantic theory hitherto (Jackendorff, Frege, Lakoff, many others), in a system built on a modification of X-bar structures.

Section 5 discusses “residual philosophical issues”, their own concessions about in what ways their system may not be total or complete, in characterizing the “world”.

What does the author feel is lacking, in their system’s ability to represent the world itself, as the final layer which “language” is translated into and out of? (As in, the total sum of states and conditions which determine how and why I formulate any sentence I do; how we get from a world state to a thought to a logical form to a syntactic one).



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.