Advanced search
1 file | 255.65 KB Add to list
Author
Organization
Project
none
Abstract
The crucial role that mathematical notation systems have played in the success of the hard or mathematical sciences is well known and richly documented: the origin of the history of these sophisticated notation systems more or less coincides with the birth of modern science. The role of our linguistic notation systems (as applied to, or used in, the scientific study of nature), by contrast, is hardly documented at all, at least not in a systematic way. We distinguish between (metaphorical and non-metaphorical) meta-scientific terms and scientific terms and, as far as the latter is concerned, between methodology and content terms. It is the latter sort of terms that interest us here. Five different dysfunctions in the relationship between scientific linguistic tokens and their referents will be presented and illustrated: scientific terms or phrases can not only be imprecise, they can also be meaningless, indiscriminate, inapt and ambiguous. By correcting or alleviating such dysfunctions, our linguistic notation systems have, in the course of the past four centuries, become more refined and functional scientific tools. This simple, illustrated taxonomy is not only historically relevant, it may also help contemporaneous scientists to identify and avoid possible pitfalls, associated with the use of language in science.
Keywords
notation systems, terminological problems, scientific progress, linguistic reference

Downloads

  • Linguistic reference in science-final.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 255.65 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Tanghe, Koen, Alexis De Tiège, and Stefaan Blancke. “Linguistic Reference in Science : Problems and Progress.” SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I . Vol. 1. Sofia: STEF92 Technology Ltd., 2016. 603–610. Print.
APA
Tanghe, K., De Tiège, A., & Blancke, S. (2016). Linguistic reference in science : problems and progress. SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I (Vol. 1, pp. 603–610). Presented at the 3rd International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts, SGEM 2016 , Sofia: STEF92 Technology Ltd.
Chicago author-date
Tanghe, Koen, Alexis De Tiège, and Stefaan Blancke. 2016. “Linguistic Reference in Science : Problems and Progress.” In SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I , 1:603–610. Sofia: STEF92 Technology Ltd.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Tanghe, Koen, Alexis De Tiège, and Stefaan Blancke. 2016. “Linguistic Reference in Science : Problems and Progress.” In SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I , 1:603–610. Sofia: STEF92 Technology Ltd.
Vancouver
1.
Tanghe K, De Tiège A, Blancke S. Linguistic reference in science : problems and progress. SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I . Sofia: STEF92 Technology Ltd.; 2016. p. 603–10.
IEEE
[1]
K. Tanghe, A. De Tiège, and S. Blancke, “Linguistic reference in science : problems and progress,” in SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I , Vienna, Austria, 2016, vol. 1, pp. 603–610.
@inproceedings{7193253,
  abstract     = {The crucial role that mathematical notation systems have played in the success of the hard or mathematical sciences is well known and richly documented: the origin of the history of these sophisticated notation systems more or less coincides with the birth of modern science. The role of our linguistic notation systems (as applied to, or used in, the scientific study of nature), by contrast, is hardly documented at all, at least not in a systematic way. We distinguish between (metaphorical and non-metaphorical) meta-scientific terms and scientific terms and, as far as the latter is concerned, between methodology and content terms. It is the latter sort of terms that interest us here. Five different dysfunctions in the relationship between scientific linguistic tokens and their referents will be presented and illustrated: scientific terms or phrases can not only be imprecise, they can also be meaningless, indiscriminate, inapt and ambiguous. By correcting or alleviating such dysfunctions, our linguistic notation systems have, in the course of the past four centuries, become more refined and functional scientific tools. This simple, illustrated taxonomy is not only historically relevant, it may also help contemporaneous scientists to identify and avoid possible pitfalls, associated with the use of language in science.},
  author       = {Tanghe, Koen and De Tiège, Alexis and Blancke, Stefaan},
  booktitle    = {SGEM 2016, BK 3: ANTHRPOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS, VOL I },
  isbn         = {978-619-7105-52-0},
  issn         = {2367-5659},
  keywords     = {notation systems,terminological problems,scientific progress,linguistic reference},
  language     = {eng},
  location     = {Vienna, Austria},
  pages        = {603--610},
  publisher    = {STEF92 Technology Ltd.},
  title        = {Linguistic reference in science : problems and progress},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.5593/sgemsocial2016HB31},
  volume       = {1},
  year         = {2016},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: