In recent years, several kinds of non-referential uses of names have received attention within semantics. However, the lack of a principled basis for drawing the distinction between uses that a semantic theory of names must account for (‘literal’ uses) and other uses that it need not explain by itself (‘non-literal uses’) represents an important deficiency in the debate. A prominent objection (the ‘Sceptic’s Challenge’) against semantic views that treat predicative uses as literal exemplifies the kind of problem that can result from this deficiency. This article proposes a general manner of drawing the line between literal and non-literal uses of names. Further, by providing a rationale for treating predicative uses as literal, it also provides a response to the Sceptic’s Challenge.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nikhil Mahant (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: