The Thoughts Of Russell Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics [5]

Russell (1961: 635-6):

This theory, which is a modern form of nominalism, has two defects, one logical, the other psychological.  To begin with the logical objection: 'When we have found a resemblance among several objects,' Hume says, 'we apply the same name to fit all of them.'  Every nominalist would agree.  But in fact a common name, such as 'cat', is just as unreal as the universal CAT is.  The nominalist solution to the problem of universals thus fails through being insufficiently drastic in the application of its own principles; it mistakenly applies these principles only to 'things', and not also to words.

Blogger Comments:

Through the lens of Systemic Functional Linguistic Theory, the word 'cat' can be used for the class (Attribute) and a member/instance (Carrier).  Both are construals of experience as meaning.

Russell treats the common name 'cat' as within language, but the universal CAT as a 'thing' outside language.  That is, he treats meaning as transcendent rather than immanent, and it this that both undermines his logical objection to Hume, and confuses him about the 'problem of universals'.