In Defense of Public Language

notion of 'common, public language' that remains mysterious...useless for any form of theoretical explanation....There is simply no way of making sense of this prong of the externalist theory of meaning and language, as far as I can see, or of any of the work in theory of meaning and philosophy of language that relies on such notions, a statement that is intended to cut rather a large swath. (Chomsky 1995, pp. 48-9) It is a striking fact that despite the constant reliance on some notion of 'community language' or 'abstract language,' there is virtually no attempt to explain what it might be. (Chomsky 1993, p. 39) ....either we must deprive the notion communication of all significance, or else we must reject the view that the purpose of language is communication. ...It is difficult to say what 'the purpose' of language is, except, perhaps, the expression of thought, a rather empty formulation. The functions of language are various. (Chomsky 1980, p. 230) I have yet to see a formulation that makes any sense of the position that "the essence of language is communication." (Chomsky 1980, p. 80; see also 1992b, p 215) At frequent intervals over the years, Professor Chomsky has inveighed against both common sense and technical notions of public language or "externalized language," claiming that they are confused, ill-defined, or of no scientific interest. As a scientist, he would be interested in public language only if it were a "real object of the real world"(Chomsky 1993:39) rather than an "artifactual" and "arbitrary" notion (Chomsky 1985:26). I propose to articulate such a notion of public language for him. Chomsky has also denounced the notion that the purpose of language is communication. I will argue, on the contrary, that a primary function of the human language faculty is to support linguistic conventions, and that these have an essentially communicative function. Despite this bold display of sounded disagreements with Chomsky, however, I agree with his objections to common views of public language completely: People who live near the Dutch border can communicate quite well with people living on the German side, but they speak different languages in accordance with the sense of the term Dummett argues is 'fundamental'..... (1992a, p. 101) Public language is a sprawling mass of crisscrossing, overlapping conventions, some known to some people, others to others. It does not divide into discrete portions, German versus Dutch versus French. What …