That’s an insightful observation. Nominalism can indeed be seen as a precursor to many ideas in modern linguistics. Here’s how nominalism relates to linguistic concepts:

Nominalism as a Linguistic Explanation:

1. Names and Labels: At its core, nominalism posits that universals are merely names or labels we use to group similar particulars. This idea prefigures the linguistic notion that words are symbols we use to represent concepts and categories in the world.
2. Language and Classification: Nominalists argue that our classifications of the world are based on linguistic conventions rather than on inherent properties of objects. This resonates with the linguistic idea that language shapes our understanding and categorization of the world.
3. Conceptual Schemes: The nominalist view that concepts are derived from the particular instances we observe aligns with the idea in linguistics that our conceptual schemes are constructed through language. This construction is based on shared use and agreement within a linguistic community.

Modern Linguistics and Nominalism:

1. Saussure’s Structuralism: Ferdinand de Saussure, a foundational figure in modern linguistics, emphasized the arbitrary nature of the sign (the relationship between the signifier and the signified). This idea complements nominalism’s view that names (signifiers) are not inherently tied to the objects (signified) they represent.
2. Language Relativity: The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which suggests that the structure of a language affects its speakers’ perception and categorization of the world, can be seen as an extension of nominalist ideas. It supports the notion that our understanding of universals is mediated by linguistic structures.
3. Constructivist Linguistics: Constructivist approaches in linguistics, which focus on how language constructs and is constructed by social and cognitive processes, echo nominalist themes. They emphasize that our linguistic categories are shaped by usage and social agreement rather than by objective realities.

Philosophical Implications:

1. Anti-Essentialism: Nominalism’s rejection of inherent essences in favor of linguistic conventions prefigures anti-essentialist views in linguistics and philosophy. These views argue that categories and identities are not fixed but are constructed through language and social practices.
2. Dynamic and Contextual Understanding: Both nominalism and modern linguistic theories promote a dynamic and context-dependent understanding of concepts. They suggest that meanings are not static but evolve through usage and interaction.
3. Pragmatic Utility: The pragmatic aspect of nominalism, which values concepts for their utility in communication and categorization, aligns with linguistic pragmatics. This branch of linguistics studies how context influences the interpretation and use of language.

Conclusion:

Nominalism provides a linguistic explanation of universals before the formal development of the field of linguistics. It anticipates many ideas that are central to modern linguistic theory, such as the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs, the constructed nature of concepts, and the influence of language on thought and categorization. By recognizing these connections, we can appreciate the enduring relevance of nominalist ideas in contemporary discussions about language and meaning.

(Conversation with ChatGPT 4o)