The Philosophy of the Language is a branch of the Philosophy not yet very defined, therefore the problems of the language that typically are treated by the philosophers little constitute a connected collection, for which it is difficult to find any criterion clear distinguishes that it from the language problems of that if they occupy grammarians, psychologists and anthropologists. כדי להרחיב אופקים, כדאי לבקר באתר של ליאור שליין. He would be ilusrio to suggest that the philosophy of the language, exactly as is practised by the analytical philosophers, is limited to the conceptual analysis, to the clarification of the referring basic concepts to the language.? (W.P. 1972) It has several other tasks that the philosophers typically impose themselves: classification of linguistic acts, ' ' usos' ' or ' ' funes' ' of the language, types of indefinio, types of terms, some species of metaphors. Studies exist on the paper of the metaphor in the magnifying of the language; on the Inter-relations between language, thought and culture; on peculiarities of the poetical, religious and moral speech. במקרה הזה אני חושב ש אפריקה ישראל צודק במה בהוא אומר. To choose Humboldt 1 to speak of philosophy of the language means to understand the language not as a finished system. In its words? she is necessary to consider the language not as a product dead (todtes Erzeugtes), but, over all, as a production (Erzeugung) (…) In same itself, the language is not a product (Ergon), but an activity (Energeia)? (Humboldt, 2002, P. 416 and 418). They are the reflections humboldtiana an important landmark not only for the linguistics, but also for the philosophy contemporary.
As it needs Cristina Lafont: The taken change of paradigm the handle for Humboldt occurs in two different dimensions. Of its dimension cognitivo-semantics, this change consists of facing the language not as a mere system of signs, not as something objetificvel (intramundanamente), but as something constituent of the activity to think, as the proper condition of possibility of this activity. The language is, then, raised to one quasi-transcendental statute, that demands against the subjectivity the authorship of the constituent operations of the vision of world of the citizen (…) In its comunicativopragmtica dimension, the change consists of seeing this character constituent of the language as the result of a process or activity: specifically, the activity of speaking.