Donnellan's Referential-Attributive Distinction

Definition

Donnellan's referential-attributive distinction differentiates between two ways definite descriptions can function in language: as referential, where they point to a specific individual, and as attributive, where they describe a general property without necessarily referring to a specific person. This distinction is crucial for understanding how language conveys meaning and reference, particularly in the context of definite descriptions.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. In referential use, a definite description points to a specific individual, while in attributive use, it conveys properties that might apply to any individual fitting that description.
2. Donnellan's distinction challenges the traditional view that definite descriptions always have the same meaning regardless of their use.
3. The distinction has significant implications for debates around reference and meaning in philosophy of language and semantics.
4. Referential uses can lead to misunderstandings if the listener assumes an attributive interpretation, highlighting the importance of context.
5. The distinction is also relevant in discussions of presupposition and implicature in conversation.

Review Questions

• How does Donnellan's referential-attributive distinction enhance our understanding of definite descriptions?
  • Donnellan's referential-attributive distinction enriches our comprehension of definite descriptions by clarifying how these phrases can serve different functions. When used referentially, they point directly to a specific individual, whereas in their attributive use, they describe properties applicable to any potential individual. This insight reveals the complexities involved in interpreting statements and demonstrates how the context significantly influences meaning.
• Discuss the implications of Donnellan's distinction for Russell's theory of definite descriptions.
  • Donnellan's distinction presents a challenge to Russell's theory by emphasizing that not all uses of definite descriptions are merely quantificational. While Russell posits that definite descriptions can be reduced to existential claims about individuals, Donnellan argues that context matters greatly; certain phrases can refer to specific entities rather than adhering strictly to Russell's framework. This has led to further exploration in semantics about how language functions in conveying both meaning and reference.
• Evaluate how the referential-attributive distinction impacts our understanding of presupposition and implicature in conversational contexts.
  • The referential-attributive distinction fundamentally affects our grasp of presupposition and implicature by illustrating how context shapes interpretation. In conversation, if a speaker uses a definite description referentially but the listener interprets it attributively, this can lead to presuppositions that aren't aligned with the speaker’s intent. Consequently, recognizing this distinction allows for better communication and highlights the necessity of considering contextual cues when interpreting language in discourse.

Related terms

Definite Description: A phrase that denotes a particular individual or group, often introduced by the definite article 'the,' which can be used either referentially or attributively.

Russell's Theory:

A theory proposed by Bertrand Russell that explains definite descriptions in terms of quantification, suggesting that a statement involving a definite description can be broken down into existential claims.

Contextualism: An approach in semantics that emphasizes the role of context in understanding the meaning of language, particularly how it affects the interpretation of referential and attributive uses.