Direct Arguments for the Truth-Condition Theory of Meaning

1. Competition between philosophical theories of linguistic meaning is sometimes specious. For example, suppose Ned believes that an utterance‘s meaning is its truth-condition, while Ted insists that the utterance‘s meaning is constituted by the speaker‘s communicative intentions à la Grice. Here one wants to distinguish explananda: What Ned is after is really the utterance‘s (―timeless‖) sentence-meaning; Ted is focusing on speaker-meaning, which is not the same, and the two theories are perfectly compatible, indeed mutually complementary, accounts of distinct phenomena