Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  predicates of personal taste
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
This article is concerned with an analysis of semantics and the normativity of evaluative judgments, in which “aesthetic concepts” and “predicates of personal taste” are used in the context of the evaluation of selected cultural forms (foods and beverages). Qualitative data obtained through semi-structured interviews with representatives in four categories of actors in the cultural field (non-experts, fans, makers, and professional critics) are analyzed. In the light of the findings, theories of aesthetic judgment are critically assessed, which on the one hand, postulate the categorical semantic and normative difference between aesthetic concepts and predicates of personal taste and, on the other hand, conceive aesthetic disputes from an epistemological point of view and do not sufficiently take into account their pragmatic context. In conclusion, a functional analysis of the semantics and normativity of evaluative judgments is presented, in which the speakers use terms from the field of aesthetics.
EN
In the present paper I present the metalinguistic solutions to the ‘lost disagreement’ problem proposed (independently) Sundell and Plunkett [2013] and Barker [2012]. I argue that metalinguistic negotiations about taste, even though successful in explaining the intuition of disagreement in a vast number of cases, are not an accurate solution to the disagreement problem in contextualism when it comes to the most paradigmatic case of “tasty”. I also argue against the account of faultless disagreement explained via vagueness of taste predicates [Barker, 2012]. I believe that the notion of faultlessness employed in the discussion of vagueness [Wright, 1994] is a different notion than the one employed in the discussion of taste discourse [Kölbel, 2003].
3
84%
Studia Semiotyczne
|
2016
|
vol. 30
|
issue 2
129-153
PL
W niniejszym artykule proponuję pewną klasyfikację wyrażeń ocennych. Uznaję, że podstawowym kryterium odróżnienia ich od wyrażeń deskryptywnych jest test bezbłędnej niezgody. Następnie omawiam kilka zjawisk, które mogłyby podawać w wątpliwość linię tego podziału: zależność kontekstową, nieostrość i używanie wyrażeń deskryptywnych do wyrażania sądów ocennych. Przytaczam propozycję Christophera Kennedy’ego (2016), zgodnie z którą przymiotniki stopniowalne mogą wyrażać dwa rodzaje subiektywności. Modyfikuję to stanowisko przez postulat wyróżnienia dodatkowego podrodzaju wyrażeń subiektywnych, które nie są ocenne (nazywam je doświadczeniowymi) i proponuję test językowy, który pozwala je identyfikować. W końcu sprawdzam, gdzie moja klasyfikacja umiejscawia predykat smaku „smaczny”. Sugeruję, że niesie on semantycznie zakodowaną pozytywną ocenę oraz warunek swojego użycia – tj. informację, że można go użyć do pozytywnego ocenienia smaku czegoś, co strukturalnie upodabnia go do terminów ocennych nietreściwych (ang. thin evaluative terms), nie mówi bowiem nic deskryptywnego.
EN
In my paper, I propose a certain classification of evaluative expressions. I hypothesize that the basic criterion to distinguish between evaluative and descriptive terms is the faultless disagreement test. Next, I discuss a few kinds of phenomena which seem to render this distinction dubious: context-sensitivity, vagueness and using descriptive terms to express evaluative judgments. Further, I investigate Ch. Kennedy’s proposal (2016) according to which gradable adjectives can express two kinds of subjectivity (one being generated by vagueness and one stemming from evaluativity). I modify this account by postulating another sub-class of subjective adjectives (“experiential adjectives”) which are not subjective due to vagueness and which are not evaluative either as they do not necessarily encode any valence. I propose a linguistic test to identify these expressions. Finally, I check where my classification of adjectives places the predicate of personal taste “tasty”. I suggest that “tasty” is both evaluative and experiential and additionally, it carries a condition of its own use, that is the information that it can be used to positively assess the taste of something. This, I argue, makes it similar to thin evaluative terms as it carries no descriptive component at all.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.