PhilArchive
open access
Are there empirical cases of indeterminacy of translation?
Quine’s writings on indeterminacy of translation are mostly abstract and theoretical; his reasons for the thesis are not based on historical cases of translation but on general considerations about how language works. So it is no surprise that a common objection to the thesis asserts that it is not backed up by any positive empirical evidence. Ian Hacking (1981 and 2002) claims that whatever credibility the thesis does enjoy comes rather from alleged (fictitious) cases of radical mistranslation. This paper responds to objections of that kind by exhibiting actual cases of indeterminacy of translation.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Quine’s conflicts with truth deflationism#94957
- Translation in Theory and Practice: The Case of Johann David Michaelis’s Prize Essay on Language and Opinions (1759)#748495
- The Wall and Its Beyond#723075
- Quine and the Problem of Truth#89506
- ◉ The Pistis Proof Burden: Hebrews 11:1, Greek Semantic Range, and the Illicit Upgrade from Assurance to Evidence#221310
Record · ID 766931
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive