PHILOSOPHY OF LANGUAGE

The course is scheduled among the core educational activities of the MA degree programmes in Philosophical Sciences and in History of Arts and Conservation of Artistic Heritage.
It contributes to the educational targets of the "theoretical area" by providing specialized competences concerning the main issues in contemporary philosophy of language and philosophy of mind.
This course promotes a critical approach to topics that are central for the current debate in philosophy of language and philosophy of cognitive science.

The course aims to provide the following knowledge, competences and abilities:

1) Knowledge and understanding:
- knowledge of the classics of the discipline as well as of the main figures of the contemporary debate;
- understanding of both traditional and contemporary key texts of the discipline;
- knowledge and understanding of specialized issues that have characterized the evolution of the philosophy of language in the shift from the traditional reflection on linguistic signs to the formal approach developed by contemporary analytic philosophy.

2) Ability to apply knowledge and understanding:
- development of an independent approach and a criticial-constructive attitude towards the great philosophical-linguistic questions;
- ability to produce sound arguments to support a claim;
- ability to use example and counterexamples;
- ability to distinguish the main theoretical options concerning a given philosophical-linguistic issue.

3) Judgment ability:
- ability to establish links between (apparently different or unrelated) topics and positions;
- ability to evaluate the consistency and plausibility of a given philosophical-linguistic claim, also by considering examples and counterexamples;
- ability to grasp and develop the theoretical and practical implications of the different philosophical options available.

There are no mandatory prerequisites. A knowledge of the basic concepts of the philosophy of language (BA course level) will help.
In any case, each topic will be introduced from the beginning in class, to allow students without a philosophical background to fully comprehend them.

LANGUAGE, MIND AND REALITY: PARADIGMS IN COMPARISON

The teaching aims to explore various case studies within the contemporary debate with the following objectives:

(a) to introduce students to specific issues of intrinsic relevance to today's philosophical discussion
b) starting from the individual cases, compare different definitions and conceptualizations of “language”
c) highlight crucial theoretical disagreements, implicit and explicit, on how the language interfaces with reality (physical and social) and cognition (individual and distributed).

Topics of high interest in today's debate will be presented on the merits of the particular development of each, but also with the aim of highlighting how in each of them a revision of some underlying theoretical conceptions is at work with respect to foundational questions around the relations between language, mind and reality.
Specifically, it will emphasize how the so-called “pragmatic turn” in the cognitive sciences relates to some traditional categories of the philosophy of language, questioning them and aiming to redefine them more closely to “embodied” and “situated” conceptions of linguistic thought.

The more bluntly philosophical implications of this paradigm shift will be brought out particularly with regard to contemporary developments in the social philosophy of language, which is concerned with the relationship between language, social reality and speech communities.

Topics covered will include:

- Semantics, pragmatics, performativity in philosophy of language
- The problem of slurs and hate speech
- The classical cognitivist model and the challenges of embodiment and antirepresentationalism
- Classical and embodied definitions of language compared
- Language and thought: the classical problem of linguistic relativity
- Contemporary non-cognitivist revisions of linguistic relativity
- The debate on language and social inclusion

*MANDATORY READINGS (ordered by topic)

BIANCHI, C. (2021) "Hate speech: Il lato oscuro del linguaggio", Laterza, (Introduzione, capp. 3 e 4; posseduto in BALI-CFZ)

TOMASETTA, A., MARRAFFA, M. DI FRANCESCO, M. (2017) "Filosofia della mente. Corpo, coscienza, pensiero", Il Mulino (pp. 117-130 e 138-146)

MARRAFFA, M. (2021) "La cognizione delle 4E: riforma, non rivoluzione". Sistemi intelligenti. 1/2021 (will be sent by teacher)

CLARK, A., TORIBIO, J. (1994). “Doing without representing?”. Synthese. 101, 401-31 (open access - https://era.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/1842/1301/3/Doingwithout.pdf - Traduzione italiana di parti selezionate fornita dal docente)

PENNISI, A., PERCONTI, P. (a cura di) (2011) "Le scienze cognitive del linguaggio" (pp. 14-26, 45-60)

LOVE, N. (2004). "Cognition and the Language Myth". Language Sciences, 26(6), 525–544.
KIVERSTEIN, J., VAN DIJK, L. (2021) "Language without representation: Gibson’s first- and second-hand perception on a pragmatic continuum". Language Sciences 85.

KOERNER, "Towards a full pedigree of the 'Sapir-Whorf hypothesis'". (selected parts)
JOSEPH, J.E., "The immediate sources of the ‘Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis’" (selected parts)

EVERETT, C. (2013) "Linguistic Relativity". De Gruyter Mouton (parti selezionate fornite dal docente; posseduto in BALI-CFZ)
LEE P. (2000). When is ‘linguistic relativity’ Worf’s linguistic relativity? In M. Pütz e M. Verspoor (Edd.), Current Issues in Linguistic Theory. Explorations in Linguistic Relativity (Vol. 199, p. 45). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (parr. 1-3 = pp. 45-55)

ENFIELD, N.J. (2015) "Linguistic Relativity from Reference to Agency". Annual Review of Anthropology, 44(1), 207–224 (open access)

SULIS, G., GHENO, V. (2022) “The Debate on Language and Gender in Italy, from the Visibility of Women to Inclusive Language (1980s–2020s)”. The Italianist 42(1), 153-183 (open access)
THORNTON, A. (2022) "Genere e igiene verbale: l’uso di forme con ə in italiano", AION-L 22, 11-54 (open access)

ROSOLA, M. (2024) “Which Is the Fairest of Them All? Evaluating Gender-Fair Strategies In Italian”. Phenomenology and Mind, n. 27 - 2024, pp. 84-109 (open access)
BATISTI, F. (2024) "La problematica ricezione della relatività linguistica nel dibattito su lingua e rappresentazione sociale in Italia", Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio 18, pp. 99-121 (open access)

*EXTRA READINGS (ordered by topic, not mandatory)

PATERNOSTER, A. (2011) "La ricostruzione filosofica della scienza cognitiva: una lente deformante?". Sistemi Intelligenti. 1/2011, 7-24.
CUFFARI, E., FIGUEIREDO, N. (2025) "Intentions in interactions: an enactive reply to expressive communication proposals". Synthese, 205, 46.
DI PAOLO, RODRIGUEZ JORDA' (2025) Linguistic relativity from an enactive perspective. Language Sciences, 108.
VASALLO, B. (2023) "Linguaggio inclusivo ed esclusione di classe", Temu.

The standard mode of examination is oral. The dialogue between teacher and student aims to test the latter's knowledge and mastery of the fundamental topics covered in class.

It is possible, on a voluntary basis, to agree with the lecturer on a topic to be explored in depth in order to give an oral presentation during the last week of class. The talk should be about 15-20 minutes long and must be accompanied by material aids such as an MS PowerPoint presentation (or other similar software) or paper handouts to be distributed to the audience. In any case, the student who gives an oral presentation will be required to take a short oral interview on the day of the examination.

It is possible, on a voluntary basis, to submit a term paper of 3,500-5,000 words excluding the reference list, on a topic agreed in advance with the lecturer and to be handed in at least 5 days before the date of the examination. The paper will in any case be discussed with the lecturer orally on the day of the roll call.

The in-class presentation and the written paper are mutually exclusive as alternative modes of examination to the purely oral one. In other words, it is possible (and not mandatory) to choose either one or the other.

oral

18-22 range: Sufficient knowledge and understanding of the textbooks and related topics, Limited ability of analysis and criticism, Sufficient communication skills
23-26 range: Fair knowledge of the textbooks and related topics, Fair ability of analysis and criticism, Fair communication skills
27-30 range: Good or very good knowledge of the textbooks and related topics, Good or very good ability of analysis and criticism, Good or very good communication skills.
30 "cum laude": It will be awarded to students with excellent knowledge and understanding of the textbooks and related topics.

Traditional asymmetrical lecture, seminar lecture (class discussion), possibility of in-class presentations held by the students (encouraged).
Students are advised to begin reading the texts as the course proceeds.

Italian

Please pay attention to actual dates of class.

This subject deals with topics related to the macro-area "Human capital, health, education" and contributes to the achievement of one or more goals of U. N. Agenda for Sustainable Development