The Grammar of Names

Abstract

Names have a distinctive grammar. A survey of the three main traditions in the study of names: onomastics, philosophy, and linguistics, reveals much concern with the meaning of names. Despite controversy over the nature of this meaning, there has been general agreement that names are very distinctive in this respect. Not much of this work has questioned their assumed grammatical status as a sub-type of noun, however. The book, adopting a traditional notional framework and using observations concerning a number of languages (but particularly English and Greek), argues that the semantic distinctiveness of names is matched by a syntax distinct from that of nouns; that they have more in common with pronouns; and that, indeed, names are categorially distinct from and more basic than nouns, though both belong to a cross-class that also includes pronouns and determiners. This match between the semantics and syntax of names is in accord with the assumptions of notional grammar; mismatches are parasitic upon a notionally-based syntax rather than being what is basic to syntax. The syntax of names is determined by three main notional functions: identification, as arguments in predications; address, as vocatives; and nomination ('name-giving'), which establishes the identificatory capacity of names. Semantically, though primarily serving to permit direct reference, names depart from the Millian ('non-connotative') assumption in showing rudimentary sense. It is these differences in sense (notion) that underlie the traditionally recognized classes of name, the most salient of which are discussed here.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 198 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.