• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.131-154
• /
• 2013

Michael Williams, in his paper, rejects the wide-accepted view that Donald Davidson's radical interpretation is a truth conditional account of meaning, and suggests a claim that robust truth in fact does not play any role in Davidson's interpretation and thus interpretation can be in accord with the deflationary theory of truth. In this paper, I will first research the right understanding on the explanatory relations in radical interpretation between truth and meaning, and on that ground, will evaluate the adequacy of Williams' suggestion. My diagnosis is that the acceptability of Williams' idea depends on how we regard the several factors which are crucial for interpretation. Especially I will argue that whether truth condition is regarded as deflationary or inflationary makes difference to the way of understanding radical interpretation, hence the room for taking radical interpretation as deflationary can be in two different ways. Furthermore I will show the same argument can be applied to Williams' another claim that Paul Horwich's use theory of meaning is similar to Davidson's account.