Husserl’s Concept of Pure Logical Grammar

Abstract

Husserl raises the following problem: once the difference between dependent and independent meanings is reduced to the difference between dependent and independent objects, it is a question—for the dependent objects—of a law of essence governing their need for completion; consequently, meanings are subordinated to a priori laws determining their combination into new meanings (Husserl, 1984, B 317). Since all combinations of meanings presuppose a form of composition—that is to say, a dependent meaning—then, the very passage to a new meaning is subordinated to an a priori law. For example, “X and ... ” can be completed by Y—“X” and “Y” refer to nominal categories—, but not by “and” or “or”, without being nonsense: “X and and”, “X and or”.