A Semantic–Pragmatic Theory of Proper Names

99s aipsniai / a icles keyWo ds: unique deno a ion, e e ence, name lemma, p esupposi ion, de ini eness, basic le el meaning, es ablished linguis ic con en ion, g amma , ans- la ion. esMiniai ŽodŽiai: unikali deno acija, e e encija, ik inio žodžio lema, p ielaida, apib ėž- umas, p adinė eikšmė, nus a y a ling is inė kon encija, g ama ika, e imas. WiLLy Van Langendonck uni e si y o Leu en ields o esea ch: synch onic linguis ics, cons uc ion g amma and dependency syn ax, e e ence and seman ics, onomas ics, name heo y, ma kedness, p o o ypicali y, iconici y, wo d-o de , g amma - ical ca ego ies such as de ini eness, gene icness, numbe , g amma ical ela ions, p eposi ions. a seMan ic-P agMa ic heo y o P oPe naMes seman inė p agma inė ik inių žodžių eo ija anno a ion his a icle aims a an ex ended seman ic-p agma ic analysis o p ope names in eac ion o he educ ionis app oach o icha d coa es’ P agma ic heo y o P ope hood (aLL 2012). i is a gued ha names ha e a leas wo kinds o p esupposi ion: g amma ical ea u es (espe- cially de ini eness) and a ca ego ical (basic le el) p esupposi ion, which makes subca ego iza ion o names possible. all his is connec ed o he claim ha names do no only e e uniquely in language use (a equen unc ion, hough no he only one) bu also deno e uniquely a he le el o es ablished linguis ic con en ion. o ende his accep able, i is essen ial o dis inguish be ween name and name lemma. his dis inc ion is also ele an o he ealm o possible con- no a ions and he issue o name ansla ion. g amma ical, philosophical, psycho- and neu o- linguis ic e idence is adduced. ano acija Šio s aipsnio ikslas – pa eik i išsamią seman inę p agma inę ik inių žodžių analizę ea- guojan į edukcionis inį požiū į, ku į icha das coa esas išdės ė p agma inėje ik inių žodžių eo ijoje (aLL 2012). s aipsnyje siekiama į ody i, kad ik iniai žodžiai emiasi ben d iejų ūšių p ielaidomis: g ama iniais požymiais (ypač apib ėž umu) i ka ego ine (p adinio lygmens) 100 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX p ielaida, ku i suda o sąlygas ik inių žodžių subka ego iza imui. Visa ai y a susiję su eiginiu, kad ik iniai žodžiai ne ik nu odo unikalų objek ą kalbos a osenoje (dažna, ačiau ne ie- nin elė unkcija), ačiau i pažymi jį nus a y os ling is inės kon encijos lygiu. kad ai ap ų p iim ina, s a bu išski i ik inį žodį i ik inio žodžio lemą. Šis išsky imas aip pa susijęs su įmanomų kono acijų s i imi bei ik inių žodžių e imo klausimu. s aipsnyje pa eikiami g a- ma iniai, iloso iniai, psicholing is iniai i neu oling is iniai į odymai. 0. in oduc ion in ce ain onomas ic qua e s, p agma ics – mos ly in he na ow sense o lan- guage use – appea s o be a ashionable opic o he unde s anding o p ope names [hence o h – names]. names a e hen no longe de ined a p io i, bu in- e ac i ely, om discou se, om con e sa ion (de s e ani and Pepin 2006: 131). coa es (2006b: 38) s a es: “… in any case, wha is a name o one language use may no be o ano he ”. his seems o mean ha he speake decides on he cha ac e iza ion o ‘p ope hood’. howe e , while i is ue ha a p agma ic iew o language and name esea ch encompasses he s udy o con ex , discou se, alk in in e ac ion e c., i does no necessa ily imply ha he language use should decide on he s a us o p ope names as such. in i s ex eme o m, his pos mod- e n poin o iew would en ail ha he name heo is is h ea ened by unemploy- men . appa en ly, ou ea u ns ou o be p ema u e since coa es (2000; 2005; 2006a; 2006b; 2009; 2012) un olds a ull- ledged p agma ic name heo y, which is in ac as a p io i as o he heo ies: he P agma ic Theo y o ‘P ope hood’ (PTP). (see al eady Van Langendonck 2007a: 65–71). he P P in e p e s p agma ics as he s udy o language use and name heo- y as he s udy o name usage, bo h in a a he na ow sense. as a consequence, g amma and e en seman ics a e ha dly aken in o accoun . hus, he P P seems o be eage o educe he numbe o concep s needed o cha ac e ize names. howe e , mo e elabo a e de ini ions o he no ion o p agma ics ha e been p o- ided in he li e a u e, o which we need no use occam’s azo . on he whole, i seems sa e o simply speak o a linguis ic heo y, in which seman ics, p ag- ma ics and g amma a e inco po a ed. in his case, p agma ics and seman ics a e ai ly in e wined, o some linguis s e en indis inguishable. o ins ance, he dis inc ion be ween an asse ed and p esupposed meaning is p agma ic as well as seman ic. ake he much discussed sen ence The King o F ance is bald, whe e he king’s exis ence is p esupposed (albei in a men al, ic ional wo ld), bu he baldness is asse ed. in a seman ic app oach, he p esupposi ion o exis ence is p ese ed unde nega ion, whils he asse ion is no : The King o F ance is no bald. he e is a mo e p agma ic e sion o he no ion o p esupposi ion, as a a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 101s aipsniai / a icles ule compa ible wi h he seman ic one (ho n 1996).1 Las bu no leas , g amma needs no longe be he poo cousin o p agma ics, nei he o names, no o o he wo d classes. in his pape , i will especially deal wi h seman ic-p agma ic aspec s o ‘p ope - hood’, and endea o o a i e a a sa is ac o y name heo y ha allows o an in- eg a ed heo y o all h ee componen s: p agma ics, seman ics, and g amma , as was i s p oposed o he whole o linguis ics by he philosophe Mo is (1938). o his end, i will discuss he P P, poin ou i s weaknesses, and p opose solu ions ha a e based on seman ic and p agma ic conside a ions and co obo a ed by mo phosyn ac ic c i e ia. he mo phosyn ax will be discussed ex ensi ely in Van Langendonck ( o hcoming). a p elimina y poin o be made conce ns he dis inc ion be ween name and name lemma. in Van Langendonck (1999; 2007a: 7–8, 95–102), i in oduce and elabo a e on a dis inc ion be ween name and p op ial lemma.2 a name is an ex- p ession assigned uniquely o an en i y in es ablished onomas ic and linguis ic con en ion ( o me langue, see below), e.g. in sen en ial cons uc ions o in a biog aphical, encyclopedic lexicon o amily o o he names (e.g. Le Pe i Robe des noms p op es, 2000). by con as , a p op ial lemma is me ely an onomas ic dic iona y en y in which no speci ic en i y is designa ed, ye . Mos ly, he pu pose o such dic iona ies (like lis s o i s name lemmas) is o p o ide e ymologies. hese lemmas, “d awn om s ock” (coa es 2006b: 39) a e mean o gi e ise o di e en names, each assigned o a speci ic deno a um in an ad hoc unique way. in hemsel es, p op ial lemmas nei he deno e no e e . bu hey ha e his po- en ial, which mos ly also con ains a p o o ypical ca ego y, such as ‘ emale’ in he case o Ma y. he e, coa es’ wo ds could apply: hey “a e ca ego ized expec a ion- ally…” (coa es 2012: 132, n. 16). bu i should be clea ha his does no apply o names in es ablished onomas ic con en ion. hese deno e and ca ego ize unique- ly, eady o be used in discou se o e e , o possibly o add ess someone. no e 1 ho n (1996: 305) cha ac e izes p esupposi ional meaning in he ollowing way: “ o p esuppose some hing is o ake i o g an ed in a way ha con as s wi h asse ing i ”; o : “a p oposi ion is p esupposed i and only i i is ( ea ed as) non-con o e sially ue in e e y wo ld wi hin he wo king con ex se .” – s awson (1950 [1971: 12, 25]) speaks o ‘implica ions’, and la e on (1959), o ‘p esupposi ions’. 2 coa es (2006b: 28; 2012: 132, n. 16) appea s o con ound name- o m (i.e. phonological shape), p o- p ial lemma and p ope name. ha is why o his au ho , deno a ion is no conside ed unique, and names a e no ca ego ized absolu ely. – b endle (2008) makes dis inc ions simila o hose in Van Langendonck (2007a): p ope name = nomeme; p op ial lemma = a chinomeme; name in language- use = nome. hence, implici ly, he dis inguishes be ween unique deno a ion and e e ence. – e en he language philosophe s awson (1950 [1971: 6-8]) dis inguishes be ween ‘an exp ession’ and ‘a use o an exp ession’, whe e an exp ession is akin o a lemma, since i is said no o e e ye . 102 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX ha no all lemmas a e p op ial. some a e appella i e, e.g. gladia o , om which he ilm name Gladia o was de i ed. he e o e, i will speak o ‘name lemmas’ o include all possible lemmas. he P P is buil a ound wo ideas (coa es 2012: 119; 120), which a e implic- i ly p esen in language philosophical wo k like ha o Mill (1843) and s awson (1950 [1971] espec i ely, quo ed in coa es (2012: 119–120):3 1) P ope names ha e no sense 2) he essence o being a name is o be ound in e e ence, no in deno a ion Whils he i s claim is no uncommon, hough oo absolu e, he second is a he con o e sial, and has a - eaching consequences. i will deal wi h bo h claims, and e iew ou special co olla ies o he P P: - P ope names do no o m a de e mina e se - P ope names do no all in o logically secu e ca ego ies - P ope names canno be ansla ed - heo izing he in e ace be ween p ope and non-p ope exp essions has neu ophysi- ological (and psycholinguis ic) implica ions 1. P oPe naMes haVe no sense o come o g ips wi h he no ion o ‘sense’, we can pu speci ic ques ions asked by s ephen ullmann and o he schola s, such as: Wha does he wo d ‘ able’ mean? o Wha do you unde s and by ‘ able’? i hese a e ques ions ha make sense, hen he wo d has ‘sense’, i.e. de ini ional lexical meaning. indeed, we can gi e a de i- ni ion o he wo d able as ound in dic iona ies. usually, such wo ds, in his case he common noun able, show polysemy, i.e. a cohe en se o seman ic ea u es, o which o en one is p o o ypical. o ins ance, Webs e ’s dic iona y de ines a able as a piece o u ni u e consis ing o a smoo h la slab ixed on legs; his sense is akin o he sense o a able o a con en s lis , and so on. on he basis o hese senses, we can ind he e e en s. by con as , in he case o names, he designa ion p e ails o e he meanings o be discussed he ea e . as ullmann (1969: 33) con ends: “one canno possibly say ha one unde s ands 3 no e ha nei he s awson (1950) no bu ge (1973) apply a possible dis inc ion be ween e e ence and deno a ion, so i is ob ious ha hey ‘choose’ he conc e e no ion o e e ence, and no he abs ac concep o deno a ion. i is he mo e ob ious o bu ge, who sees names as p edica i e s uc u es wi h a ee a iable, hence also accep ing “modi ied p ope names” like an Al ed (p. 429). bu in such a amewo k, names canno be said o be senseless. a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 103s aipsniai / a icles a p ope name; one can only say ha one knows whom i e e s o, whose name i is.”4 i does no make sense o ask: Wha does he wo d ‘London’ mean? o : Wha do you unde s and by ‘London’? his applies o p onouns as well: i does no make sense o ask: Wha do you unde s and by ‘he/she’, o ‘ his’? so, nei he names no p onouns appea o ha e sense, i.e. de ini ional lexical meaning, le alone a polyse- mous s uc u e.5 1.1. P esupposi ional meanings in names Whe eas asse ed, de ini ional meaning (o sense) is excluded o names, hey can display p esupposi ional meanings. hese should be dis inguished om con- no a ions o associa ions. While conno a ions a e con ingen a ibu es o names o name lemmas (see below), p esupposi ional meanings a e inhe en p ope ies o all names, and a e mi o ed in mo phosyn ac ic ea u es o hem. i dis inguish g amma ical and ca ego ical meaning. a. g amma ical meaning bo h names and (a leas pe sonal and demons a i e) p onouns ha e so-called g amma ical meanings (agains coa es 2006b: 39; 2012: 124), such as de ini eness, which indica es a p esupposi ion o exis ence and uniqueness in he eal o men- al wo ld. examples: London, he Rhine; he/she, his s. inde ini e somebody, some- hing. de ini eness can be called a weak o m o deixis (see also La Palme- eyes 1993 below o names). in my iew, whils bo h names and (pe sonal and demon- s a i e) p onouns ha e unique e e ence in discou se, names ha e unique deno a- ion as well, bu p onouns only ha e non-unique deno a ion. as we will see, he P P ejec s unique deno a ion o any ca ego y. no e ha he wo old simila i y be ween names and p onouns conce ning deixis (de ini eness) and he absence o de ini ional sense, and in he P P also o unique deno a ion, en ails ha his 4 simila obse a ions we e by made by nicolaisen (1995: 391); o ge man: boesch (1957: 32) and debus (1980: 194). bu b endle (2005: 108–109) ejec s he ele ance o such s a emen s since he adhe es o a kind o maximum meaning ulness heo y o names. 5 coa es (2012: 121) men ions he e m in ension, bu i hink we can dispense wi h his e m, a leas as concei ed o in he P P. in his app oach, his no ion seems o esemble wha many esea che s, including mysel , call ca ego ical meaning. – in he same pa ag aph, coa es says: “names canno no ha e sense” by Lyons’ (1977) de ini ion. his mus be a yping e o and should ead: “names canno ha e sense”. 104 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX heo y canno di e en ia e hese wo nominal classes (see below o e e ence and deno a ion).6 o he g amma ical meanings common o names and (pe sonal and demons a i e) p onouns a e numbe ( he Ruwenzo i s. he Andes; she s. hey), and gende (La in Julius s. Julia; english he s. she). u he mo e, in con as o p onouns, names ha e mo e p esupposi ional mean- ing han jus g amma ical ea u es. b. ca ego ical (basic le el) meaning names, bu no name lemmas (compa e coa es 2012: 125) ha e an inhe en ca ego ical o , mo e p ecisely, a basic le el p esupposi ion. geach (1957, sec ion 16) and sea le (1958) claim his ca ego ical knowledge o be necessa y o all uses o a name in o de o p ese e he e e en ’s iden i y. in a long oo no e, e en he ‘ ag’ heo is k ipke (1972, commen s, p. 351-352, n. 58) b ings up ca ego i- cal meaning in names. s awson (1959: 171, 198) sees ‘so al uni e sals’ in a sen- ence like Fido is a dog, an animal, a e ie , and speaks o ‘a p esupposi ion o empi ical ac ’. some linguis s a gue in he same ein: Van Langendonck (1968), kal e kämpe (1978: 89, con ounding name and name lemma), kleibe (1996: 582; 2004, sec ion 4.4), ku yłowicz (1980), cisla u (2006; 2012), Le oy (2012). exam- ples a e: Pa is is a ci y, and The Thames is a i e . i is ue ha one can say: The ( i e ) Thames is no a i e , bu his implies a con adic ion be ween he p esup- posi ion ha he hames is a i e and he asse ion ha i is no . such ca ego i- cal p esupposi ions make he subca ego iza ion o names (no o name lemmas) possible (compa e b endle 2004; debus 2012, and see below). Psycholinguis s as well see a ca ego ical, and mo e p ecisely, a basic le el mean- ing, in names. La Palme eyes e al. (1993: 445), es ablish he o mula: [ eddie: dog] = [ his: dog], which is o be ead as: “ eddie in he kind dog” is “ his in he kind dog.” hence, he e is a deic ic componen in names ( his), jus as in p onouns, bu he e is also a ca ego ical meaning (dog), which is o he wise a common noun. his si ua es names in be ween p onouns and common nouns (see also Molino 1982: 19, and o u he e idence, Van Langendonck 2007a: 169–171). 6 coa es (2006b: 41) claims ha p onouns do ha e sense. o ins ance, in his/ hese s. ha / hose, he no ion o p oximi y indica es he di e ence. i s , his is no (de ining) sense, bu a g amma ical ea u e. i canno easonably ask: “Wha do i unde s and by his?” second, p oximi y is almos only ele an whe e his and ha a e opposed, e.g. his, no ha ! compa e he ph ase Tha Geo ge Bush in sen ence (4), whe e ha is used emo i ely. hi d, in o he p onouns, p oximi y does no play a pa . a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 105s aipsniai / a icles neu olinguis ic e idence is p o ided by baye (1991). a ge man aphasic wi h deep dyslexia could no ead names aloud, bu she was able o speci y elemen a y ea u es like ‘masculine’, ‘ eminine’, ‘ci y’, o ‘coun y’ belonging o a name. in ac , hese a e basic le el p esupposi ions. baye dis inguishes hem (wi h a di e - en du ch e m) om associa ions (conno a ions, see below). he a gues ha as- socia ions belong o he ‘episodic memo y’, whe eas he ca ego ical meaning belongs o he ‘seman ic memo y’ (see Van Langendonck 2007a: 110–113). i will be clea ha a s ic ly Millian app oach (coa es 2009) canno accoun o he conclusions d awn om hese neu olinguis ic phenomena. o g amma ical e idence conce n- ing ca ego ical meaning, see sec ion 3, b). ha may su ice o p esupposi ional meanings. a di e en kind o onymic meanings conce ns conno a i e meanings. 1.2. conno a i e o p agma ic meanings in names o name lemmas Van Langendonck (2007a: 81 .) dis inguishes be ween wo kinds o conno a i e meanings: some o hem pe ain o he e e en and o he s o he name lemma o he e ymology. conno a i e o associa i e meanings pe aining o he e e en o names a e con ingen (ancilla y, c . coa es 2012: 133–138). Wha meanings, i any, a e ac i- a ed, depends on he con ex and eal wo ld knowledge. o he associa i e mean- ings pe ain o he name lemma on a synch onic basis o on he basis o he e y- mology as a as his is s ill anspa en . bo h kinds o conno a i e meaning a e p agma ic pa excellence. a. P agma ic meaning pe aining o he name lemma o he e ymology he e a e names whose lemma meaning is synch onically anspa en , as in bynames, in li e a u e, o in magical names. his anspa ency could ha e g adu- ally aded away so we ha e o speak o e ymological, his o ical meaning. - neu al conno a ions can be synch onically p esen in name lemmas. o ins ance, he name he Rocky Moun ains s ill says wha i is abou . he meaning ‘ ocky moun ains’ can be ac i a ed in a con ex o no . - emo i e meaning appea s as a ea u e o ce ain synch onically anspa en name lemmas, e.g. o diminu i e (e.g. du ch Jan- je, Ma ie-ke) and augmen a i e 106 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX o ms (e.g. lemish/du ch dialec al Be -en, Miel-e) o gi en names, exp essi e al e na i e name lemmas, especially bynames o nicknames, such as lemish/du ch den Dikke ‘ he a one’, de Wi e ‘ he whi e one’, den IJze en ‘ he i on one’, Belgen- land ins ead o België ‘belgium’, Absu dis an as a nickname o A ghanis an (see Van Langendonck 2007a: 22, 195–197; compa e Palme 1976). i no e he e ha people may lay emo i e conno a ions in he name- o m o name lemmas, such as i s name lemmas. o ins ance, some name-gi e s like i alian names o gi ls, e.g. Gigliola; o he s dislike name- o ms such as De le , e c. as i is well-known, nowadays, Wes e n i s names should sound nice (see Van Langendonck 2010b). - ic ion, li e a u e and names. cha ac onyms conno a ions connec ed wi h he name lemma a e used a lo in ic ion, e.g. Snow Whi e. We should especially hink o cha ac onyms in li e a u e, like doll Tea shee , becky Sha p, i us G oan, e c. (coa es 2012: 136). - names and magic old ge manic pe sonal names like Be n-ha d ‘s ong as a bea ’ show a magical wishing cha ac e . he e i is pa icula ly clea ha he meaning belongs o he lemma, since nume ous pe sons could ha e a name wi h he same name lemma. also, we know ha hese meanings ha e g adually aded away om abou he yea 1000. nowadays, only he e ymologis knows wha he i s name Be na d mean a housand yea s ago. he e a e o he cases o e ymological meaning. - e ymological meaning he e a e conno a ions pe aining o an e ymologically anspa en wo d, e.g. he amily name Bake may emind us o a bake bu no necessa ily. su ely, e ymo- logical meanings may be misleading: Longb idge is no longe a b idge bu a place (coa es 2012: 135). Peak’s unnel is no longe a unnel,bu a b idge (see below). b. P agma ic meaning pe aining o he deno a um o he e e en he e a e conno a ions pe aining o he deno a um o he e e en . We obse e a con inuum om encyclopedic a ibu es o less objec i e, subjec i e conno a ions. ‘ ace s’ o meaning belong o he se o objec i e conno a ions. - We obse e a con inuum om encyclopedic conno a ions a ached o he de- no a um, as in, e.g. Napoleon los he ba le o Wa e loo, o uly subjec i e associa- ions, which will usually pe ain o a e e en in discou se, e.g. Ann does no seem o like Obama. he neu opsychologis semenza (2009) emphasizes he di e ence be- ween he se s o cohe en meanings in common nouns and he possible se s o in- cohe en conno a ions in names. o example, he e is no seman ic ela ion be ween a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 107s aipsniai / a icles he s a emen s: Obama is p esiden o he Uni ed S a es, Obama has a wi e and child en, Obama does no ea hambu ge s, e c. Polysemy as in appella i es is lacking he e. - inally, he e a e hese ‘ ace s’ o meaning, as cisla u (2006; 2012) calls hem, using ench, omanian and ussian ma e ial. al hough he basic le el meaning o ci y names is ‘ci y’, and ha o coun y names is ‘coun y’, hese geog aphical names o en adop addi ional meanings induced by me onymy. english examples: (1) Pa is elec ed a new mayo < The ci izens o Pa is elec ed a new mayo (2) Ame ica decided o decla e wa on e o < The go e nmen o The Uni ed S a es o Ame ica decided o decla e wa on e o Pe sonal names, especially o a is s, can s and o he wo k he a is s p oduced: (3) Rodin se ou e dans la oisième salle du musée (Lemgha i 2011) ‘( he wo k o ) odin is o be ound in he hi d oom o he museum’ When one akes all hese ‘meanings’ (p esupposi ions and conno a ions) o- ge he , and pu s hem on a pa , i is unde s andable ha some people ega d names as he ca ego y wi h he mos meaning o all wo d classes. he maximum mean- ing ulness heo y (Van Langendonck 2007a: 39 ., 51, 58; coa es 2012: 137–138) is ound al eady in jespe sen (1924: 66) and mo e ecen ly in cogni i e Linguis ics (in he wides sense). Langacke (1991), and in qui e a di e en cogni i e ame- wo k, hansack (2004) and b endle (2008) a e mode n p oponen s o his iew. howe e , i will be clea om he o egoing a gumen a ion ha i is highly im- plausible o pu all meanings, in hei di e en unc ion o sense, p esupposi ions, o conno a ions on he same le el. We can conclude ha in he i s g ea deba e on he philosophy o names be ween john s ua Mill and be and ussell (in he wake o go lob ege), hey bo h a e w ong: Mill’s (1843) and coa es’ (2012) ‘ ag’ heo ies igh ly ejec (de ini ional) sense bu igno e p esupposi ions (unknown in he 19 h c.), espe- cially he inhe en ca ego ical p esupposi ion o names (no o name lemmas), whe eas ussell’s (1918) desc ip ion heo y seems o allow names (‘sho hand desc ip ions’) o ha e de ini ional sense. al hough names can ha e meanings pe - aining o he deno a um o he e e en , o o he name lemma and he e ymol- ogy, all hese belong o he p agma ic use o names in discou se. al hough i deny de ini ional sense o names, he abo e g amma ical and ca - ego ical p esupposi ions, and e en he conno a i e meanings, dis inguish names om nonsense-wo ds. ejec ing any sense o p esupposi ional meaning will ende i ha d o seman ically dis inguish names om nonsense-wo ds. coa es’ way ou is o disce n sense om meaning in a a he b oad sense. hus, names ha e meaning in ha “ hey ‘mean’ indi iduals when hey a e used” (coa es 2006b: 41–42). in coa es (2012: 133) we ead ha “ he meaning o any name is es ablished h ough 114 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX en in discou se. as a ule, wi hou a deno a um you canno e e (bu see below). bu su ely, new names can easily de elop since names cons i u e an open class (agains ande son 2004: 457; compa e coa es 2006b: 30). i hey s ay, hey en e he onomas icon as deno a a, and discou se as e e en s o as o ms o add ess. 3. naMes, es abLished Linguis ic conVen ion, and g aMMa he iew ha names ha e a unique deno a ion and can e e in discou se is in acco dance wi h Langacke ’s (1987) no ion o es ablished linguis ic con en ion ( o me ly langue o compe ence), o ming a con inuum wi h language use ( o - me ly pa ole o pe o mance). jus as deno a ion is an abs ac ion om e e ence e c., es ablished linguis ic con en ion is an abs ac ion om language use. only in es ablished linguis ic con en ion does i make sense o speak o g amma o mo - phosyn ax, which mos linguis s call he hea o linguis ic sys em. in his way, names can be gi en a genuine place in g amma as a s uc u al ca ego y, like all o he wo d classes. Le ’s discuss hese dis inc ions. a) es ablished linguis ic con en ion Langacke ’s concep o es ablished linguis ic con en ion is lexible and use ul, also o names. as a pa o i , we disce n es ablished onomas ic con en ion. names en e es ablished onomas ic con en ion ia bes owal o ia g adual onymiza ion. his allows us o make h ee obse a ions. 1) al hough he P P admi s ha ac s o e e ence ix he deno a ion o p op- e nouns (coa es 2006b: 39; 2012: 121), i is no clea whe e his deno a ion inds i s place i names a e de ined in e ms o e e ence in language use. clea ly, unique deno a ion pe ains o es ablished linguis ic con en ion. he ejec ion o his uniqueness in he P P again p ohibi s a dis inc ion be ween names and p onouns since in his amewo k bo h essen ially e e in language use, e en i hey appea o deno e as well, bu no uniquely in he P P. he lack o he no ion o es ab- lished linguis ic con en ion led philosophe s like be and ussell ([1918] 1964: 201; 1919: 179) o claiming ha genuine names we e ‘logically p ope names’, i.e. e e ing wo ds like his o ha (compa e k ipke 1972: 345, n. 16; see abo e). ussell called o dina y names ‘sho hand desc ip ions’. su ely, e e ing wo ds like his o ha e e uniquely in a ce ain con ex , bu he e e ence will di e in ano he con ex . howe e , aking k ipke’s e m ‘ igid designa o ’ se iously, names deno e uniquely in any con ex . a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 115s aipsniai / a icles 2) he e is a con inuum om es ablished onomas ic con en ion o he use o names in speech and w i ing. We may use a name jus once, and hen o ge i , so i does no en e es ablished onomas ic con en ion. o ins ance, e e ing o an unpopula gues , we could say: Hi le is coming onigh . in his example, Hi le is a new e e en in discou se only, no a deno a um in es ablished onomas ic con en ion, ye . ha is one ex eme. he o he ex eme o names is ha many ha e been unc ioning in socie y o cen u ies, o ins ance amily names, o ci y, coun y, i e names, and he like. 3) he no ion o es ablished onomas ic con en ion allows us o ecognize ha he e a e well es ablished names known and used in only small communi ies, such as nicknames in a amily, e.g. du ch Ons Pop ‘ou doll’, called ha by he a he . his is an es ablished name in his minimal lemish communi y (Van Langen- donck 2007a: 286). he o he ex eme is ha he e exis names known wo ldwide, such as A ica o Mandela. b) g amma and names Wi hin he amewo k o he P P, in which he essence o names is o e e in discou se, a g amma o names can ha dly ind i s place. coa es claims: “p ope hood is bes unde s ood as a p agma ic a he han a g amma ical o s uc u al no ion” (coa es 2000: 1166; 2005: 3; 2006a: 369). al hough coa es (2006b: 39) accep s ha he e exis ‘p ope nouns’ (like Ma y, John), his no ion is called “epiphenomenal on he no ion o onymic e e ence”, whe e onymic is no u he de ined. in acco dance wi h Webs e ’s de ini ion o ‘epiphenomenon’, ha would mean ha a p ope noun – o a p ope noun ph ase (coa es 2006a) – is a seconda y phenomenon accom- panying e e ence using names and caused by his e e ence. bu since coa es (2006a) con as s onymic wi h seman ic e e ence, p onouns a e onymic as well, as hey lack de ini ional sense, jus like names. in o he wo ds, he no ion ‘onymic’ and hose o ‘name’ and ‘p ope noun (ph ase)’ emain in need o a genuine de ini ion (see also ande son 2007: 120, quo ed in coa es 2006b: 39). P ope names a e wo ds jus as o he s (likewise ande son 2003: 360; see also nübling, ahlbusch and heuse 2012). de ia ing om he gene al no ion o wo d class pu s he bu den o p oo on he one who de ia es. on he o he hand, i we assume he P P is igh in essence, why would a simila analysis no apply o all lexemes in language: nouns, e bs, e c.? i so, we a e saying ha es ablished linguis ic con en- ion is an epiphenomenon o language use, o in be e con en ional e ms: es ab- lished linguis ic con en ion is an abs ac ion om language use, and his can ha dly be called a new insigh . Wha ha e we gained in he P P’s easoning? Wha i p o- 116 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX poses boils down o emphasizing he ole o e e ence and language use, and mini- mizing he ole o deno a ion and es ablished linguis ic con en ion. howe e , his ine i ably leads o neglec ing he ole o g amma in de ining names and o he lin- guis ic ca ego ies. o he P P, names a e no e en a s uc u al ca ego y (see abo e), al hough i is no o iously di icul o dis inguish hem om o he nouns: common nouns and p onouns. ins ead, we should con inue he iew ha g amma desc ibes es ablished linguis ic con en ion, de ines names as ha ing a unique deno a um be- sides an unde lying name lemma, and as a subclass o nouns ha ake de e mine s in english, while p onouns do no , e.g. ha modi ying Geo ge Bush in (4), and B i - ain’s modi ying Je emy I ons in (5): (4) Tha Geo ge Bush is a nice guy. (Vandelano e and Willemse 2002: 22) (5) B i ain’s Je emy I ons was p esen a he p emie e in New Yo k. (Vandelano e and Wil- lemse 2002: 25) u he , we can di e en ia e names om common nouns. close apposi ional pa e ns o he o m [(de ini e a icle) + noun + (de ini e a icle) + noun], e.g. Fido he dog, a e ele an o he de ini ion o names in english and also o he ca ego ical meaning o he name (Van Langendonck 2007a: 4, 131).13 he uni ha does no cha ac e ize bu iden i y is a name, i.e. Fido. he appella i e dog indica es he ca ego ical p esupposi ion. g amma ical, i.e. mo phosyn ac ic, ea u es a e o cou se language speci ic.14 While mos indo-eu opean languages seem o con ain close apposi ions (e.g. ench la ille de Pa is, du ch de s ad Ams e dam, o Polish: mias o K aków ‘( he) ci y (o ) c acow’, a numbe o o he language g oups do no show pa allel s uc u es. 15 he e is no p oblem wi h ha as long as we mean he same by ‘name’, i.e. he compa a i e concep (c . haspelma h 2010 o his no ion) ‘uniquely deno ing nominal exp ession wi h a basic le el p esupposi ion, bu wi hou de ini ional sense’. e e y language makes use o he s uc u es a ailable. hus, ban u lan- guages use nominal classes and ag eemen ma king as indica ions o p ope hood. o example, in he ban u language e on, “p ope names, whe he hey a e ancien hyd onyms, oponyms o clan names, o imp o ised nicknames, a e always o class 1 a” (Van de Velde 2006; 2008). names o mon hs appea in close apposi ion, e.g. 13 Mol mann (2013) deals wi h ‘so als’ and close apposi ions wi h names om a di e en pe spec i e. 14 see also haspelma h (2010): “desc ip i e o mal ca ego ies canno be equa ed ac oss languages because he c i e ia o ca ego y-assignmen a e di e en om language o language.” 15 su ely, no all close apposi ions gi e us he basic le el meaning, e.g. P esiden Obama does no say ha obama is necessa ily a p esiden . Mos ly, he basic le el meaning is no o e ly exp essed, espe- cially no in p o o ypical names such as pe sonal names, whe e i is aken o g an ed. a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 117s aipsniai / a icles he mon h o June. ha means hey a e names. his is con i med by o he lan- guages. in he aus onesian language u aluan, names o mon hs ha e onymic s a us: when somebody asks abou he name o he mon h, he in e oga i e p o- noun used o names is p oduced. Likewise, in apa nui, spoken on he eas e island, names o mon hs a e ma ked by he ‘pe sonal ma ke ’ a, indica ing onym- ic s a us, e.g. i a ho a i i ‘in augus ’ (idia o 2007, aken o e by Van Langen- donck and Van de Velde 2007: 459–461). unique deno a ion o names mi o s he g amma ical ac ha names ake no es ic i e ela i e clauses, as has been a gued epea edly (see also Van Langendonck 2007a: 143). o ake a du ch example, i is ung amma ical o say: (6) *Ka el die in Londen woon , kom mo gen. ‘cha les who li es in London is coming omo ow’ in con as , i can say: (7) De Ka el die in Londen woon , kom mo gen. ‘The cha les who li es in London is coming omo ow’ Whils in (6) he e e ence o ka el canno be es ic ed since a name wi h a unique deno a ion is in ol ed, in (7), es ic ion is possible since he noun ph ase de Ka el con ains an appella i ized p op ial lemma. as i a gued abo e, e en he basic le el p esupposi ion is co obo a ed mo pho- logically and/o syn ac ically. names o coun ies usually display a su ix o indica e coun y s a us, e.g. Fin-land, Ge man-y, Chin-a (see Van Langendonck 2007a: 202- 206). Whils close apposi ions can gi e us he basic le el meaning in mos indo- eu opean languages (c . Fido he dog, he i e Thames), in ce ain ban u lan- guages he basic le el meaning is indica ed by ag eemen . Van de Velde (2009: 224) s a es: “P ope names in ki undi igge he same ag eemen pa e n as he common noun ha is used o e e o hei basic le el ca ego y”. i e e o Van Langendonck ( o hcoming) o u he g amma ical e idence o name s a us and basic le el p esupposi ion in names. 4. co oLLa ies o he P P P ope names do no o m a de e mina e se he e is some hing o say o his iew, i only because no lexical ca ego y con- s i u es a de e mina e se . he main eason o he uzzy bounda y be ween name and appella i e is he ac ha he e a e p o o ypical names like i s and amily names, and place names (bo h wi h mainly p op ial lemmas a he basis), and less 118 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX p o o ypical names such as names o languages, whe e i wholly depends on he cons uc ion whe he a noun unc ions as a name o as a common noun, compa e (a) Kalka ungu is an exo ic language; (b) I’ll ne e lea n any Kalka ungu (Van Langen- donck 2007a: 65, 70, 243). in (a), he language name is uly onymic, in (b) i beha es as a quan i ied common noun. ade and b and names cons i u e a simila case (Van Langendonck 2007a: 235–238; 2007b). numbe s can be seen as names, appella i es o adjec i es, again acco ding o he cons uc ion (Van Langendonck 2007a: 239 .), compa e: (a) Th ee is a sac ed numbe ; (b) he numbe h ee [apposi ion]; (c) I saw h ee lions. in (a) and (b) h ee is a name, bu in (c) i unc ions as a kind o adjec i e. so, g amma can help us ou , al hough he P P ne e adduces any o mal, i.e. mo pho- syn ac ic e idence, since g amma seems o be jus an epiphenomenon o his heo y (see abo e). names o mon hs cons i u e ano he ma ginal onymic ca ego y. al hough hese names o en occu in apposi ion, hei deno a ion does no always seem o be unique because o he cyclic cha ac e o mon hs, compa e: (a) June was ai ly ho (non-cyclic) s. (b) June is always ho (cyclic). ha ’s why he s a us o mon h names is much dispu ed (c . Van Langendonck 2007a: 55, 64). i is no in- concei able ha such ma ginal names a e cons ued di e en ly in di e en lan- guages, e.g. as names o as appella i es (see abo e). g amma can help us ou as well in he case o such exp essions wi h non- p op ial, especially appella i e-based lemmas, such as he Old Vica age (coa es 2006a). su ely, when his exp ession is used in speech, con ex will decide on i s s a us, as in he case o o dina y homonymy. howe e , on he le el o es ablished linguis ic con en ion (ne e men ioned in he P P), he e a e wo exp essions: he name he Old Vica age, and he appella i e-based noun ph ase he old ica age. in he las ins ance, he exp ession is a genuine ph ase, since i can be pene a ed by o he elemen s, e.g. he old bu s ill beau i ul ica age. his is no possible in he name he Old Vica age, which beha es as [a icle + onymic wo d Old-Vica age]. in addi ion, he e we can appella i ize he name by saying: I don’ know o ano he Old Vica age. inally, in names as he Rocky Moun ains, he No h Sea, he A lan ic Ocean, he basic le el meaning is o mally exp essed. his is no always he case, such as in he P P’s a o i e example Peak’s Tunnel, which is in ac a b idge, no a unnel (coa es 2012: 125). he e o e, we can assume a con inuum om syn- ch onically anspa en names like he No h Sea o names wi h an e ymologically anspa en bu synch onically misleading conno a ion, like Peak’s Tunnel. a inal poin is ha people appea o hesi a e in he case o exp essions like he uni e se, o he in e ne . up o he p esen day, hey a e eal single deno a a, i.e. single ons, bu i would no call hem names since no ca ego ical p esupposi ion is a ailable. ha hey a e usually no capi alized is an indica ion o appella i e s a us, hough no eal p oo . a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 119s aipsniai / a icles P ope names do no all in o logically secu e ca ego ies his hesis again con ounds name (a ibu ed o an en i y) and name lemma (no ye a ibu ed). i is essen ial o ealize ha uniqueness and basic le el meaning a e assigned no on he le el o he name lemma, bu on ha o he name designa ing a unique deno a um. he e is no hing illogical abou ha . Ma y is a p op ial lemma ha can be assigned o women, bu su ely also o o he en i ies, like ships. howe e , Ma y deno es a unique pe son a e he lemma has been bes owed ad hoc on a pa - icula woman as a name. no a name, bu a name lemma can ha e mo e han one deno a um (see abo e; compa e coa es 2006b; 2012: 125). P obabilis ic ca ego iza- ion (coa es 2012: 121; 125–129) conce ns he lemma wi h i s mul ideno a i e po en ial, no he name. in all p obabili y, i.e. p o o ypically, he lemma Ma y de- no es a pa icula woman, and ob iously mo e han one, bu each ime ad hoc and uniquely. in my iew, names do no only e e in discou se bu cons i u e a ca ego- y o exp essions ha deno e uniquely, and subca ego ize acco ding o linguis ic ca ego ies on he basis o he synch onic basic le el meaning. ha ’s also why Peak’s unnel need no be a unnel (coa es 2012: 125). nowadays, he name deno es a b idge. seman ically anspa en his o ical gene ics may be misleading, indeed. hus, in espec o designa ion and ca ego iza ion, names di e om p onouns and com- mon nouns (i.e. de ini e desc ip ions), which is no clea in he P P. P ope names canno be ansla ed acco ding o he P P, names canno be ansla ed because hey lack sense. howe e , i will be clea ha e e y hing depends on one’s idea o wha ans- la ion is. Webs e ’s dic iona y de ines ‘ o ansla e’ as “ o u n in o one’s own o ano he language”. Mos dic iona ies o o he languages also gi e his b oad de ini ion. hus o spanish aduci , he dicciona io cas ellana (1987) has “ ol e una cosa de una lengua en o a”. he du ch Van dale (2005) de ines e alen ‘ o ansla e’ as “ an de ene aal in de ande e o e b engen” ( o ans- e om one language o ano he ). Likewise koenen-endepols (1970): “in een ande e aal o e ze en”. he ge man duden (1999) de ines übe se zen ‘ o ans- la e’ as “in eine ande en sp ache [wo ge eu] wiede geben” ( o ende in ano he language). a ew dic iona ies include he sense (o meaning) in he de ini ion. he ench Nou eau Pe i Robe de la langue ançaise (2010) gi es an elabo a e de ini ion: adui e = “ ai e que ce qui é ai énoncé dans une langue na u elle le soi dans une au e, en endan à l’équi alence séman ique e exp essi e des deux énoncés” ( o make su e ha wha was said in one 120 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX na u al language is said in ano he , s i ing o seman ic and exp essi e equi - alence o he wo u e ances). he ox o d english dic iona y (1991) is am- biguous: o ansla e = “ o u n om one language in o ano he ”, o “ o change in o ano he language e aining he sense”. i we ollow he b oade and mo e common de ini ion o ansla ion, e en i his is “a loose way” o de ining i (coa es 2012: 129), we can easily include names. he ench de ini ion and he second e sion o he oed a e appa en ly mean o sen ences. in ha case, names in a sen ence o m no p oblem, e en i hey a e no ansla ed. a his poin , u he dis inc ions ha e o be made. i s o all, we should again dis inguish be ween names and p op ial o o he name lemmas. some imes, names a e ansla ed, some imes only name lemmas a e. 1) conce ning names, a u he dis inc ion imposes i sel . names wi h an unde lying p op ial lemma ha e ei he no ansla ion o an ad hoc ansla ion, wi hou he in e en ion o sense, bu wi h ‘deno a ional equi alence’, indeed ( o his e m, see coa es 2012: 130). o ins ance, a name like ge man Möncheng- ladbach is p obably ne e ansla ed; he belgian ci y name Liège ansla es in o ge man as Lü ich, in o du ch as Luik, i.e. in coa es’ e minology, hey “ha e he same deno a um”. no e ha hese deno a a mus be concei ed o as unique. i he e was ano he Liège, he e would p obably be a di e en o no ansla ion (compa e Mechelen abo e). names wi h a anspa en unde lying appella i e lemma may o may no be ansla ed using he anspa en con en . a name like he Rocky Moun ains is seldom ansla ed in ge man and du ch bu always in ench: les Mon agnes Rocheuses (Michel a eau, p.c.). howe e , he ge man oponym de Schwa zwald is ansla ed as he Black Fo es in english, la Fo ê Noi e in ench, and he Zwa e Woud in du ch. i can be expec ed ha he ‘ ansla ion’ o anspa en unde lying elemen s is a he a bi a y, indeed, and may a y om language o language. New Yo k is no ansla ed in ench, ge - man o du ch, bu in spanish, he anspa en elemen New is ‘ ansla ed’: Nue a Yo k; likewise in Polish: Nowy Yo k. Lyons (1977) dis inguishes be ween pe - sonal names and place names. as a ule, pe sonal names a e no ansla ed, e.g. John Majo is no ansla ed in ench as Jean (le) Majeu . howe e , he names o impo an his o ical igu es a e ansla ed, e.g. Ca olus Magnus (La .) = Cha le- magne ( ) = Cha lemagne (e) = Ka l de G osse (g) = Ka el de G o e (du.). humanis s ansla ed hei su name in o La in. Me ca o was o iginally called De C eme (see abo e). olk-e ymology is a dis u bing ac o in he ansla ion o names. coa es (2012: 131) ci es he example o He e o d, which was ende ed as Hai y Foo in he language o i ish gypsies o he ea ly wen ie h cen u y.16 16 o sociolinguis ic aspec s ega ding mul iple place-name-gi ing, see Wal he (1968). a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 121s aipsniai / a icles 2) by con as , i is some imes jus p op ial lemmas ha a e ansla ed. his is he case o se e al i s names, e.g. John, Jean, Johann, Jan, o Juan go back o he o iginal p op ial lemma Johannes. in lande s, he same man can some- imes be called Jan (du ch) o Jean ( ench). Likewise, a numbe o men called Pie (du ch) a e also called Pie e ( ench). ano he example is Mi iam, om which Ma y, Ma ie, Ma ia, e c. a e de i ed. o cou se, i depends on people’s knowledge whe e comp ehensible synch ony ends and incomp ehensible dia- ch ony begins (compa e b endle 2008). hus, ia he dis inc ion be ween name and name lemma, a mo e e ined pic u e o name ansla ion could be ske ched. sense (o meaning) poses no p oblem o ansla ion. heo izing he in e ace be ween p ope and non-p ope exp essions has neu ophysiological (and psycholinguis ic) implica ions he P P con ends: “seman ic e e ence is media ed by lexical and g amma ical meaning, and i s p ocessing cos s a e he e o e highe ” (coa es 2012: 124); hence, highe in common nouns han in names. u he (p. 132): “names ha e lowe p ocessing cos s han ully a icula ed seman ically e e ing exp essions”. his leads o he Onymic Re e ence De aul P inciple (ORDP), which says ha “ he de aul in e p e a ion o any linguis ic s ing is as a name (i.e. i is ee o sense)”. how- e e , wha is he e o be in e p e ed i he e is no sense a all? in connec ion wi h nonsense-wo ds, coa es (2006b: 41) a gues himsel : “you will no be able o e e o any hing using he wo d egumai un il i ell you wha i s sense is”. and his is p ecisely wha people wan o know. anyway, no expe imen al o o he e idence is gi en o he claims o he o dP. i names ha e ca ego ical meaning, as i and many o he s ha e been claiming, his en ails ha common nouns a e p ima y since he ca ego ies in ques ion a e de i ed om common nouns. indeed, o Lan- gacke (1991) common nouns a e he basic nouns (compa e Van Langendonck 2007a: 51, 117). coa es (2012: 132) e en specula es ha “p ope /onymic e e ence is p edica ed on a sho e chain o neu ones o mo e e icien ly i ing synapses”, al hough neu opsychologis s like semenza and Ze in (1988: 718) jus sugges “ ha p ope names, like ce ain o he ca ego ies, migh be p ocessed independen ly wi hin he seman ic sys em”. he e is no men ion o p ocessing cos s. om psychology i is well-known ha people au oma ically y o make sense o any s ing o sounds o le e s, which co obo a es he linguis ic p imacy o common nouns wi h hei de ining sense. conce ning names, i o e ie e a name, he only clue is he basic le el sense (no e en p esen in he P P), and an op ional, o anyway, 122 WiLLy Van Langendonck ac a Linguis ica Li huanica LXIX an incohe en se o conno a ions, he e ie ing p ocess will be ha d. in he case o common nouns, howe e , he e is a cohe en , polysemous se o senses ha can lead much mo e easily o he iden i ica ion o an en i y. as a ma e o ac , psycholinguis s now assume ha “in compa ison o common names [i.e. common nouns, WVL], people’s names a e di icul o lea n and emembe ” (hollis and Valen ine 2001: 99). his idea comes om psychological expe imen s such as he one leading o he Bake –bake pa adox (Valen ine, b ennen and b éda 1996: 39). b ie ly, his pa adox says ha , as a ule, people being con on ed wi h a pho og aph o a man, link an ap- pella i e like bake o i a he easily, bu he homophonous su name Bake wi h signi ican ly mo e di icul y. Valen ine, b ennen and b éda (1996: 39) s a e: “names we e ecalled less equen ly han p o essions, e en when he same i ems we e in- ol ed”, as in he case o B/bake (su name and appella i e). i is assumed ha he e is a di ec link in he b ain om a man o he su name, bu a ne wo k o ela ed meanings (b ead, bake y, e c.) ha allow he subjec o e ain he ela ion be ween a man and he occupa ion bake be e han he ela ion be ween a man and he name Bake . his also explains why, as people g ow olde , hey o ge names much mo e easily han common nouns (james 2004). such psycholinguis ic indings con adic he Onymic Re e ence De aul P inciple, a leas as o mula ed in he P P. by con as , i mus be said ha hese psychological indings do no in alida e he claim ha onymic e e ence is “ he de aul mode o e e ence” (coa es 2012: 132). in he same ein, Van Langendonck (2007a: 51, 117 .; 2008) a gues ha names cons i u e he p o o ypical nouns o e e ence (deno a ion), displaying unma ked g amma ical ea u es like de ini e, and mos ly singula , conc e e, and non-gene ic. conside ing his, i will ha e become clea ha we a e con on ed wi h he pa adox ha names p o ide he p o o ypical, handies ool o deno a ion and e e ence, bu a e mo e di icul o e ie e han seman ically ully a icula ed common noun ph as- es because o he lack o de ini ional sense in names. in his connec ion, coa es (2012: 132) holds “ ha once onymic e e ence by an exp ession has been es ablished, i.e. when i has become a name, he e is no going back…” his is likely o be he case. Losing a speci ic sense will be easie han ecupe a ing i . his claim esembles he one in he huge li e a u e on g amma icaliza ion, whe e i has been a gued ha g amma ical mo phemes ha e los hei lexical sense and canno go back o hei lexical o igin (see among o he s, b in on and augo 2005). Wi h ega d o names, Van Langendonck (2009) concludes “ ha names a e nei he g amma icalized no lexicalized appella i e o non-onymic cons uc ions …, bu ha a leas ‘e olu ion names’, i.e. he names ha did no o igina e in an illocu iona y ac ou o a p o- p ial (o o he ) lemma ( o enames, ilm names, e c.) ha e unde gone a deseman i- ciza ion p ocess ha may igge a numbe o o mal p ocesses, jus as in he case o g amma ical ca ego ies, in which deseman iciza ion akes place as well.” a seman ic-P agma ic heo y o P ope names 123s aipsniai / a icles 5. concLusions My gene al conclusions a e as ollows: he P P’s hesis ha names ha e no sense should be e ined. hey ha e no de ini ional sense bu p esupposi ions, i.e. g amma ical meaning and a ca ego ical o basic le el p esupposi ion, and conno a i e, p agma ic meanings in name lemmas, such as emo i eness, li e a y and magic con en , and inally, conno a i e, ancilla y meanings pe aining o he deno a um o e e en o a name, such as encyclopedic o subjec i e in o ma ion, and ace s o meaning. he assump ion o an inhe en ca ego ical (basic le el) p esupposi ion c ucially hinges on a dis inc ion be ween names and name lemmas, o which p op ial lemmas a e he mos conspicuous. name lemmas ha e only a po en ial o deno a ion and a ibu ion o a ca ego y. When philosophe s and psychologis s hink o a ca ego - ical meaning, hey appa en ly a ibu e his o he name i sel , no o i s lemma. he claim ha he essence o being a name is o be ound in e e ence, no in deno a ion, should be e e sed: deno a ion is p imo dial and unique. o he wise, we canno e en dis inguish names om de ini e desc ip ions and de ini e p onouns. in language use, e e ence, oca ion, nomina ion and os ension should be pu on a pa . hence, e e ence as such canno de ine names. only by accep ing unique deno a ion can we speak o names as unc ioning in he sys em o es ablished linguis ic con en- ion, and e e ing in language use. Mo phosyn ax mi o s his si ua ion, e.g. names ake no es ic i e ela i e clauses, and show hei ca ego ical meaning in ce ain close apposi ions, a leas in a numbe o indo-eu opean languages, and also in ag eemen pa e ns in a leas he ban u language ki undi. Psycho- and neu olinguis ics con i m hese analyses. Whe he names en e he onomas icon by bes owal o ia epea ed e e ence o appella i e o o he cons uc ions does no change hings. secu e syn- ch onic ca ego iza ion o names is made possible by hei inhe en basic le el mean- ing and by he assump ion ha hei deno a ion in ol es uniqueness. nei he a sim- ple de ini ion o ansla ion no one in ol ing meaning p e en s us om assuming ha a numbe o names, o possibly hei name lemmas, can be ansla ed, albei in di e en ways. no expe imen al o o he e idence is gi en o he P P’s Onymic Re e ence De aul P inciple, al hough onymic e e ence appea s o be “ he de aul mode o e e ence”, p o ided ‘unique deno a ion’ unde lies he ‘ e e ence’. inally, i would like o emphasize ha g amma con i ms he plausibili y o he seman ic-p agma ic concep s and heses o he p esen heo y.17 a s a emen ha 17 he p esen heo y does no essen ially di e om he heses in Van Langendonck (2007a). howe e , i ha e ocused he e on he dis inc ion be ween unique deno a ion and unique e e ence, e ining o he no ions like ha o name lemma, p esupposi ion and conno a ion, and pu ing o wa d a ew ideas on name ansla ion.