The claim that depiction involves language-like conventions is examined, and distinguishes it from two other forms of depictive conventionalism. An argument that because conventionalism must be consistent with the distinguishing features of depiction, it must construe depictive conventions as conventions for the depiction of basic color, shape and textual properties is presented.
|Number of pages||13|
|Journal||American Philosophical Quarterly|
|Publication status||Published - 2005|