z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Is Reference Essential to Meaning?
Author(s) -
Mark Richard
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
metaphysics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2515-8279
DOI - 10.5334/met.36
Subject(s) - meaning (existential) , phrase , value (mathematics) , linguistics , context (archaeology) , noun , lexical definition , proper noun , computer science , epistemology , philosophy , machine learning , paleontology , biology
Most linguists and philosophers will tell you that whatever meaning is, it determines the reference of names, the satisfaction conditions of nouns and verbs, the truth conditions of sentences; in linguist speak, meaning determines semantic value. So a change in semantic value implies a change in meaning. So the semantic value a meaning determines is essential to that meaning: holding contributions from context constant, if two words have different semantic values they cannot mean the same thing. If this is correct, then in a fairly straightforward sense reference is essential to meaning. In this paper I argue that reference is not essential to meaning by giving an example in which groups in different circumstances use a phrase with the same meaning but a different reference.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom