2313-8912Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics2313-891210.18413/2313-8912-2015-1-4-22-23582THEORY OF LANGUAGEMENTALESE: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN LANGUAGE AND THOUGHTMENTALESE: THE CONFLICT BETWEEN LANGUAGE AND THOUGHTAlduaisAhmed M. S.AlduaisAhmed M. S.amsalduais@gmail.comAnkara University, Turkey20151400

Purpose: What does mentalese refer to as a theory introduced in the science of language is the main concern of this paper. Method: The study is mainly descriptive where previous and related studies are reviewed and presented to reach a view about mentalese as an introduced theory in the science of language. Results: It has been argued for a long time whether we think in language or do we use language to think. Having known two or more languages, do you we think separately in each language? Does each language possesses a different place in our brains? Conclusions: There seems to be an agreement about the availability of mentalese as a linguistic faculty but there are different views about the nature and the interpretation of this faculty in relation to thought.

Purpose: What does mentalese refer to as a theory introduced in the science of language is the main concern of this paper. Method: The study is mainly descriptive where previous and related studies are reviewed and presented to reach a view about mentalese as an introduced theory in the science of language. Results: It has been argued for a long time whether we think in language or do we use language to think. Having known two or more languages, do you we think separately in each language? Does each language possesses a different place in our brains? Conclusions: There seems to be an agreement about the availability of mentalese as a linguistic faculty but there are different views about the nature and the interpretation of this faculty in relation to thought.

mentalesethoughtmentalesethoughtСписок литературы1.     Antony, L. M. (n.d). What Are You Thinking? Character and Content in the Language of Thought. Retrieved from: http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/courses/content/papers/antony2.pdf at 05/05/2009. The Ohio State University.2.     Bermúdez, J. L. (2003). Thinking without words. Retrieved from: http://www.altavista.com/web/results?itag=ody&kgs=1&kls=0&r1=v2&r1=v2&r1=v2&r1=v2&q=mental at 05/05/2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press.3.     Boroditsky, L. (2001). Not-just-grammatical gender: Effects of grammatical gender on meaning. Retrieved from: http://www.ling.hawaii.edu/clrg/gender_09_25_03.pdf at 05/05/2009.4.     Clark, A. (2002). Minds, Brains and Tools: (Comments on Dennett for Hugh Clapin’s “Workshop on mental representation”, Maine, August 1999). Retrieved from: http://www.cogs.indiana.edu/andy/MindsBrains.pdf at 05/05/2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press.5.     Machery, E. (2004). You don’t Know How You Think: Introspection and Language of Thought. Retrieved from: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00001954/01/BJPS_Instrospection.pdf at 05/05/2009. Max-Planck Institute for Human Development, Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition.6.     Pinker, S. (1994). The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language. New York City: William Morrow and Company.7.     Pinker, S. (1995). The Language Instinct. London: Penguin.8.     Schlenker, P. (2006). Introduction to Language - Lecture Notes 2B Language and Thought. Retrieved from: http://www.linguistics.ucla.edu/people/schlenker/LING1-06-LN-2B.pdf at 05/05/2009. Unpublished.9.     Slezak, P. (2009). Thinking about Thinking: Language, Thought and Introspection. Retrieved from: http://www.mcox.org/introspect/Slezak-Thinking_Language.pdf at 05/05/2009.10.           Wiley, N. (2006). Inner Speech as a Language: A Saussurean Inquiry. Retrieved from: http://www.unlv.edu/centers/cdclv/pragmatism/wiley_speech.pdf at 05/05/2009. Blackwell: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.