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.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom