Knowing who and knowing how: two ways to understand reference

In this paper I’m concerned with the functional role of singular terms and how it can be used to construct a pragmatist theory of what it takes to understand reference. I argue that there are, at least, two distinct functions which singular terms fulfil, what I will call the talking-about and picking-out functions respectively. Both are, in one sense, ways that a term aids our understanding by specifying who or what a sentence is about, but they come with different requirements for being understood. To illustrate the distinction, I draw on examples from the literature on reference which give rise to very different intuitions about what it takes to understand a singular term. Finally, I argue that this leads to a parallel distinction between two kinds of knowledge-who, depending on which function we are said to know-who with respect to. For the talking-about case, a version of the standard account is sufficient. But to understand an utterance of a singular term with respect to the picking-out function, we need knowledge-who in the sense of knowing how to find what’s referred to sufficiently well to perform a contextually specified action.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Synthese
Published
2025-09-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-05208-y
Primary Topic
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Knowing who and knowing how: two ways to understand reference

Niklas Dahl
Synthese
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
article

Knowing who and knowing how: two ways to understand reference

Niklas Dahl
article en

Abstract

In this paper I’m concerned with the functional role of singular terms and how it can be used to construct a pragmatist theory of what it takes to understand reference. I argue that there are, at least, two distinct functions which singular terms fulfil, what I will call the talking-about and picking-out functions respectively. Both are, in one sense, ways that a term aids our understanding by specifying who or what a sentence is about, but they come with different requirements for being understood. To illustrate the distinction, I draw on examples from the literature on reference which give rise to very different intuitions about what it takes to understand a singular term. Finally, I argue that this leads to a parallel distinction between two kinds of knowledge-who, depending on which function we are said to know-who with respect to. For the talking-about case, a version of the standard account is sufficient. But to understand an utterance of a singular term with respect to the picking-out function, we need knowledge-who in the sense of knowing how to find what’s referred to sufficiently well to perform a contextually specified action.

SyntheseVol. 206(3)
Lund University (SE)
Lunds Universitet
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.