Thanks for your answer, Fuzzy. And sorry for the off-topic thread. I thought that as this was searching for answers, I thought that may be it was supposed to go on that other part of the site.
Yes, I hope that if I get the fulbright, they will pay for the secon GRE. If not, I guess I will have to study more and try it again. I am confident that I cuold get 160/160/4.5 if I study hard throughout the year. Analytical writing it is the harder thing to work for me... , I have always had trouble with my writing. In fact, my thesis advisor has told me that he thinks that I write better in English than in Spanish ):
The reason is that it is coherent with my work in the philosophy of language since my BA thesis. My bet is that someone who holds a naturalist stance should be able to give a positive answer to the problems in the philosophy of language. Until now, most of the answers given by philosophers such as Travis, Clapp and the like are more in a negative spirit. Sometimes, when this positions are conducive to research, they end up by recreating traditional methdological assumptions, such as computationalism, individualism etc. My bet is that pragmatism in the philosphy of language is coherent with some developments in theoretical linguistis (specifiaclly the problem of the semantics/pragmatics distinction), which requires an alternative cognitive architecture, i.e., interactionist and/or enactivist. Though, the connection is not neccesary (and there are many cases in which someone holds a radical position regarding semantics and context-sensitivity, but does not regarding cognitive architecture. e.g., Robyn Carston). In fact, some of my presentation in congresses have been of Language and Cognition, whose audience is mainly composed by psychologists, cognitive scientists and a handful of philosophers. And the universities I mentioned where having the fit in mind: UCSD because of the program, coursework and researchers there (such as Lera Boroditsky, Jim Hollan, etc.), U Chicago because of the possibility of a joint phd and the work that the researchers there are doing, and U Michigan because its philosphy department is strong in the philosophy of language, in the area I am interested, and also the linguistics department with people that work on semantics/pragmatics and theoretical linguistics.
Furthermore, I am simply bored of too much philosophical discussions without any empirical correlate and I really think that I can keep up to the date in the discussions by reviewing the relevant philosophy of language literature. But I would really like to be able to work in linguistics, to be able to evaluate and do concrete research proposals.
Also, I have had some courses in the area, in fact an important part of my MA has been done by being enrolled in cognitive sciences and linguistis courses (some of them are of both departments):
Language and Cognition: Compositionality and Context (7.0 out of 7.0) (GPA 4)
Cuture, mind and language: Tomasello's sociopragmatics (6.7 out of 7.0) (I think this is GPA 3.85)
Psycholinguistics seminar: pragmatics and interaction (6.5 out of 7.0) (I think this is GPA 3.75)
3 out of 7 courses.
Also, one of my thesis advisors (I have one extra, had to ask permission to the academic comitee) is a linguist, the director of the linguistics department.