Rules of language: reply to Mr. Carr

C. R. Carr (See Analysis, 35, 2, 51-53.) misunderstood the point of C. H. Whiteley's article on rules of language (See LLBA VIII/3, abstract 7403884.), which was that the skill of uttering meaningful sentences cannot be bounded by a set of strict rules. Carr maintained that the meaning of words must be distinguished from what a speaker means in uttering them. The distinction is there, but it has not been well expressed: words have meaning only when they are uttered with communicative intent. Type-sentences have a usual meaning; when used without their usual meaning, there is no justification for deciding that the 'words themselves' have a meaning of their own. New metaphors can be seen either as improper or as allowed by the semantic rules of the language; Whiteley accepts the latter interpretation, for which the rules are not strict. A readiness to understand extemporaneous extensions of meaning is part of linguistic proficiency. D. Burkenroad