P.F. Strawson: Reference Based on Usage and Context [Danielle Trzil]

After Strawson tears down Russell's theory, the quote that stood out the most to me about the solution Strawson believes in is: "Meaning (in at least one important sense) is a function of the sentence or expression ; mentioning and referring and truth or falsity, are functions of the use of the sentence or expression." (Strawson, 327)

This quote basically sums up the point Strawson clearly demonstrates by bringing up the King of France argument and the "I am hot" argument. The sentence/expression is exactly the same (i.e. "The King of France is wise" and "I am hot"), however, depending on the time of the utterance, the person saying these things, and the usage in a conversation, someone receiving this information would interpret the same exact sentence completely different than someone else in another setting. To sum it up: words don't refer, people do. Without human context, these sentences are essentially meaningless. This is a huge improvement from Russell and Frege's argument because communication and language is not as "black and white" as Frege and Russell want to make it. Yes, words do have direct and literal meanings, but it is the way in which those words and grammar and sense is used by humans that gives them significance.

While Strawson gives a good point about usage of language, how would he further explain inference? When the sentence is not specific with word usage but still refers to a specific event/meaning that is generally interpreted the same way among specific individuals.