Use theories of meaning between conventions and social norms Marc Staudacher Abstract: This dissertation is a contribution to the philosophy of language. Its central question is: In virtue of which facts do linguistic expressions mean what they do? E.g. why does "apple" mean apple in English? The question receives a systematic answer; in short: Linguistic expressions mean what they do because among their users, there are linguistic conventions and social norms to use and understand them in certain ways. The answer is clarified and defended as a central thesis. For in this form, it is at best a slogan: What is meaning? What is it to use and understand expressions? What are conventions and social norms anyway? How does the use and understanding determine meaning? The goal of the dissertation consists in answering these questions. In chapter 1, the project these questions belong to is explained and motivated. Three basic types (or paradigms) of accounts are distinguished, a distinction between conventions and social norms is introduced, and an adequacy condition is proposed. Thereby we’re in a position to evaluate such theories. In chapter 2, a further thesis is examined which is important for the adequacy of such theories: The so-called "normativity of meaning" thesis: If an expression means something, then there is an ought concerning its use and understanding. With an important restriction, the thesis is accepted. In chapter 3, the project is defended against a fundamental objection from Donald Davidson according to which conventions are in a sense not essential for there to be meaning. In the subsequent chapters 4 to 9, theories of the three paradigms are critically discussed: - Signaling Games: Theories of the first paradigm are a topic of active research in game theory today. According to them, language users are agents that either, as speakers, make observations upon which they send a signal or, as hearers, observe the signals upon which they react in typical ways. There are two standard interpretations of such theories. According to the rationalistic one, agents deliberate about which signal to send and how to react upon observing one. According to the alternative interpretation, agents are disposed to exhibit signaling behavior, however their dispositions are realized (typically they result from learning). - Actual Language Relations: Theories of the second paradigm are considered to be the standard in analytic philosophy. As a building block they use linguistic theories of the kind linguists develop. Such a building block is related to the social practices of language use in a community. - Evolutionary Theories: Theories of the third paradigm conceive of language as a bag of conventional behaviors which are evolutionary beneficial (in the wide sense of "evolution" which includes culture and biology). An important exponent of such a theory is Ruth Millikan. In chapters 4 to 6, current theories of the first two paradigms are discussed (mostly under a rationalistic interpretation); they go back to David Lewis. Several problems are observed which are difficult to solve. Consequently, I plead for a theory of the third paradigm. In chapters 7 to 9, accounts of the third paradigm are discussed. In chapter 7, Ruth Millikan’s and Simon Huttegger’s accounts are evaluated, the latter being an Evolutionary Signaling Games theory. Problems and limitations are observed. Among the problems is the lack of an adequate account of social norms. In chapter 8, an account of social norms is developed as it is required for the "normativity of meaning" thesis. Thereby, one of the central questions of this thesis is answered, albeit not completely. In chapter 9, an alternative conventionalist account is developed using Millikan’s account of conventions, my account of social norms, and a new description of communication which allows us to assign meanings to words directly. The account features a unique combination of characteristics that make it comparably better than the alternative conventionalist accounts discussed in this thesis. In chapter 10, the main claims of the dissertation are summarized together with a list of questions for future research. Keywords: