On The Theory of Meaning of “On Denoting”

Russell’s theories of denoting, beginning with the early theory of denoting concepts of The principles of mathematics and the unpublished intermediate studies, and culminating in the theory of “On denoting,” exemplify the characteristic features of a semantic theory. As early as the theory of Principles there is a compositional analysis of the logical form of declarative sentences, including sentences involving relational expressions and expressions of multiple generality; this analysis is combined with an implicit theory of how the truth value of a sentence as a whole is determined by the semantic values of its parts. On the surface, what separates “On denoting” from the account advanced in Principles is its inclusion of a new theory of quantification, one which showed how to achieve the goals of the theory of denoting concepts while employing only the primitive notions always true ~or, as we would say: “always holds,” and its variants! and propositional function. “On denoting” effected the ontological economy of eliminating altogether the need for the denoting concepts associated with ‘all,’ ‘every,’ ‘a,’ ‘some,’ and ‘the.’ This was rightly regarded as an advance by Russell since the notion of a propositional function was already present in Principles—indeed, it was the common property of all the approaches canvassed by Russell—and although a primitive, always true is not obviously a primitive having the same ontological import of the denoting concepts of Russell’s earlier theories. There has, for a long time, been some unclarity over the nature of the ontological economy achieved by the theory of descriptions which “On denoting” propounded. And Russell’s own presentation of the matter, especially his discussion of Meinong, has tended to obscure rather than elucidate the situation. While it is certainly true that the metaphysics of Principles was “overly generous,” recent studies have shown that the difficult step in the transition to the mature view of “On denoting” was not the elimiNOÛS 33:3 ~1999! 439–458