Philosophy of Language (Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy),   ISBN:9780415957526

Customer Rating: 

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.

Customer Rating: 

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).

Customer Rating: 

Just buyin the book for a class. Very easy to read and understand but the author adds his views. Quite frankly I just care what the major philosophers had to say. He does a great job showing what they mean using examples and his interpretation though.

Customer Rating: 

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.

Customer Rating: 

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).