, Volume 54, Issue 3, pp 277–297 | Cite as

A Neo-Husserlian Theory Of Speaker's Reference

  • Christian Beyer


It is not well known that in his Göttingen period (1900–1916) Edmund Husserl developed a kind of direct reference theory, anticipating,among other things, the distinction between referential and attributive use of adefinite description, which was rediscovered by Keith Donnellan in 1966 and further analysed by Saul Kripke in 1977. This paper defends the claim that Husserl's idea of the mental act given voice to in an utterance sheds new light on that distinction and particularly on cases where semantic referent and speaker's referent diverge. It is argued that whenembedded in a dynamic theory of intentionality, the idea of giving-voice-to allows for a pragmatic (as opposed to a purely semantic) analysis of such cases. In Section 1 an example involving a referentially used description is presented, and the view that descriptions that can be used both attributively and referentially are thus ambiguous is criticized. Section 2 is concerned with Husserl's discussion of a case where someone seems to demonstratively refer to something that he mistakes for something else. On thebasis of this discussion, a dynamic conception of the intentional content (and referent) of the mental act given voice to in an utterance is developed. Section 3 applies this neo-Husserlian conception to the example described in Section 1. Finally, it is shown how this conception serves to elucidate the referential/attributive distinction.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Beyer, C.: 2000, Intentionalität und Referenz, mentis Verlag, Paderborn.Google Scholar
  2. Donnellan, K.: 1966, ‘Reference and Definite Descriptions’, The Philosophical Review 75, 281–304.Google Scholar
  3. Evans, G.: 1985, ‘The Causal Theory of Names’, in G. Evans (ed.), CollectedPapers, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
  4. Føllesdal, D.: to appear, ‘Bolzano, Frege and Husserl onReference and Object’, in J. Floyd and S. Shieh (eds), Future Pasts, Harvard.Google Scholar
  5. Husserl, E.: 1950 ff.,Husserliana - Edmund Husserl: Gesammelte Werke (Hua), Nijhoff/Kluwer, The Hague/Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  6. Husserl, E.: 1970, Logical Investigations, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
  7. Husserl, E.:1982, Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy (Ideas I), Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  8. Kaplan, D.: 1989, ‘Demonstratives’, in J. Almog, J. Perry and H. Wettstein (eds), Themes from Kaplan,, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 481–563.Google Scholar
  9. Kripke, S.: 1977, ‘Speaker's Reference and Semantic Reference’, in P. French, T. Uehling and H. Wettstein (eds), Contemporary Perspectives in the Philosophy of Language, University of Minnesota Press, MI, pp. 6–27.Google Scholar
  10. Künne, W.: 1987, ‘The Intentionality of Thinking’, in K. Mulligan (ed.),Speech Act and Sachverhalt, Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  11. Perry, J.: 1980, ‘A Problem about ContinuedBelief’, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 61, 317–332.Google Scholar
  12. Perry, J.: 1993, ‘Cognitive Significanceand New Theories of Reference’, in J. Perry (eds), The Problem of the Essential Indexical, Oxford University Press, Oxford (1988), pp. 227–245.Google Scholar
  13. Smith, D.: 1989, The Circle of Acquaintance,Kluwer, Dordrecht. Lehrstuhl f. Theoretische Philosophie Universität Erfurt Nordhäuser Str. 63 D-99089 Erfurt Germany E-mail: christianbeyer@hotmail.comGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Beyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Lehrstuhl f. Theoretische PhilosophieUniversität ErfurtErfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations