If the claim that 'language commits us only to conventions' is itself advanced as a substantive truth, it implicitly appeals to a non-conventional fact about the nature of language.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Implicitly appeals to(describing how arguments use concepts without saying so explicitly): Assumes or relies on something without stating it directly—the assumption is hidden or built-in rather than openly mentioned.
Substantive truth(as opposed to trivial truth): A claim that tells us something meaningful about reality, rather than being true just by definition or logic alone.
convention(Used to distinguish mere regularities from convention-governed regularities in the analysis of meaning.): A regularity that obtains because there is something akin to an agreement among a group of people to keep the regularity in place.
non-conventional fact(contrasted with conventions to show something real and objective about language itself): Something that is true about reality independent of what people have agreed to or decided—it would be true whether or not anyone believed it.

Based on where you are in your exploration