Semantic Restructuring is the pursuit of enlightenment, enlivenment, empowerment through the creative re-arranging of the building blocks of meaning. For a better description, Start Here.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| Months | ||
|---|---|---|
| Jan | Feb | Mar |
| Apr | May | Jun |
| Jul | Aug | Sep |
| Oct | Nov | Dec |
Bateson, books, cogling, context, CPB, embodiment, framing, I Ching, paradox, perception influence, prisdem, semantic punctuation, sensation, techniques, unconscious
In Linguistics, what counts as scientific evidence?
Is the epistemological choice to privilege scientism antithetical to the linguistic exploitation of intuition-reliant methods (in the sense of the 1999 Geeraerts article)? I believe the point of that article was to argue in favor of viewing intuition-reliant methods, under the rubric of hermenuetics, as complementary with methods which shun the Well of Intuition.
The confusion here lies, mostly, I think, with irregularities of English. He rocked her is not ambiguous with Throw a rock at her is what he did. But the verb in question, means, looks the same whether Fred is meaning to communicate or whether there is some etheric, phlogistonic stuff called meaning. In this way X is the meaning of what Fred said invokes this stuff in a way that Fred means X does not. At least that's how the intutions of this native speaker run. (And, thank God, an appeal to un-reason admits of no argument.)
The whirl-a-gig about "meaning" was never my intended focus; the value of treating varied approaches as complementary rather than as competing was the important part. But for those who can only skin their cat one way, that's cool too.
[]
static link
writebacks: 0 (writeback = trackback +/- comment)