Abstract

In this paper I examine the three known objections to metalinguistic semantic theory of proper names: the objection of generalization, the objection of circularity, and the objection arising from Kripke’s modal argument. I’m trying to demonstrate that these objections are not conclusive as refutation or rejection of metalinguistic theory. I argue that this is a not a theory of reference but rather of the meaning or semantic value of proper names. Thus, the semantic value of a proper name “N” is “The bearer of ‘N’.” In this approach the significance of this proper name unifies all the possibilities for its referential use and allow us to defend that the name itself is an expression of language, despite arguments to the contrary.