Frances to William and others...
In the integrationist book by Harris on signs and language and
communication there are several terms that seem to be used
ambiguously. One group of related words in particular is not
clear as to their meaning. They include the terms "exist" and
"fact" and "object" and "real" and "token" and a few others. They
are sometimes used as synonyms having the same definition, but
are also often used to mean different things. The terms "type"
and "truth" also pose some confusion in the book. My search for
terminal clarity has taken to me other sources online, but with
little success so far. This vagueness may be a deliberate attempt
on the part of the integrationist framers to not be scientific or
global, but this tack to make every user in each context a
linguist may go to the failure of the thesis to be exact, and to
thus not be useful in any serious research on signage and
language. This tendency to be vague reminds me of the terms used
loosely in the Morris book on signs and language and behavior,
which vagueness has been justly criticized by experts in the
field of sign study. In any event, my slow deep read continues to
find correction for what it may be worth.
