6.1.6. Individual terms

The chief examples of individual terms are proper names, for the central function of a proper name is to refer to the bearer of the name. But a proper name is not the only sort of expression that refers to an individual; a phrase like the first U. S. president serves as well as the name George Washington. In general, descriptive phrases coupled with the definite article the at least purport to refer of individuals. These phrases are the definite descriptions discussed briefly in 1.3.7, and we have been counting them as individual terms. Still other examples of individual terms can be found in nouns and noun phrases modified by possessives—for example, Mt. Vernon’s most famous owner. Indeed, expressions of this sort can generally be paraphrased by definite descriptions (such as the most famous owner of Mt. Vernon). A final group of examples are demonstrative pronouns this and that and other pronouns whose references are determined by the context of use—such as I, you, and certain uses of third person pronouns. On the other hand, while anaphoric pronouns—i.e., pronouns that have other noun phrases as their antecedents—count grammatically as individual terms, they do not have independent reference values and will be treated differently in our analyses. We will look at their role more closely in 6.2.3; for now, it is enough to note that they raise issues for the analysis of predications that are analogous to the issues they raise for the analysis of truth-function compounds.

There is no traditional grammatical category or part of speech that includes individual terms but no other expressions. In particular, the class of nouns and noun phrases is too broad because it includes simple common nouns, such as president, as well as quantifier phrases—such as no president, every president, or a president. And neither common nouns nor quantifier phrases make the kind of reference that is required for an individual term.

Even before we look further at the reasons why this is so, we can distinguish individual terms from other nouns and noun phrases by thinking of them as answers to a which question. If you are asked Which person, place, thing, or idea are you referring to? and you reply with any of the individual terms, you have answered the question directly. On the other hand, a common noun by itself is ungrammatical as an answer, and a quantifier phrase does not provide a direct answer. While a president, no president, and every president are grammatical replies to the question Which person are you referring to?, the first two provide only an incomplete or evasive answers, and the third indicates that the question cannot be answered as asked.

The following table collects the examples we have just seen on both sides of the line between individual terms and other noun phrases:

Individual terms	Not individual terms
proper names George Washington definite descriptions the first U. S. president noun phrases with possessive modifiers Mt. Vernon’s most famous owner non-anaphoric pronouns this, you anaphoric pronouns he, she, it	common nouns president quantifier phrases no president, every president, a president

Perhaps the most that can be done in general by way of defining the idea of an individual term is to give the following rough semantic description: an individual term is

At any rate, this formula can be elaborated to explain the reasons for rejecting the noun phrases at the right of the table above.

The formula is intended as a somewhat more precise statement of the idea that an individual term names a person, place, thing or idea. It uses object in place of the list person, place, thing, or idea partly for compactness and partly because that list is incomplete. Indeed it would be hard to ever list all the kinds of things that might be referred to by individual terms. If the term object and other terms like entity, individual, and thing are used in a broad abstract sense, they can apply to anything that an individual term might refer to. In particular, in this sort of usage, these terms apply to people. The main force of the formula above then lies in the ideas of referring to a single thing and referring in a definite way.

The requirement that reference be to a single thing rules out most of noun phrases on the right of the table above. First of all, if a common noun by itself can be said to refer at all, it refers not to a single thing but to a class, such as the class of all presidents. Now this class can be thought of as a single thing and can be referred to by the definite description just used—i.e., the class of all presidents—but the common noun president refers to this class in a different way. Common nouns are sometimes labeled general terms and distinguished from singular terms, an alternative label for individual terms. The function of a general term is to indicate a general kind (e.g., dogs) from which individual things may be picked out rather than to pick out a single thing of that kind (e.g., Spot), as an individual term does. Thus the individual term the first U. S. president picks out an individual within the class indicated by the common noun president; and the class of all presidents picks out an individual within the class indicated by the common noun class. That is, a general term indicates a range of objects from which a particular object might be chosen while an individual term picks out a particular object. Although there is much that might be said about the role of general terms in deductive reasoning, we will never identify them as separate components in our analyses of logical form, and the word term without qualification will be used as an abbreviated alternative to individual term.

The remaining noun phrases at the right of the table are like individual terms in making use of a common noun’s indication of a class of objects. However, they do not do this to pick out a single member of the class but instead to help make claims about the class as a whole. The claims to which they contribute say something about the number of members of a class that have or lack a certain property, and that is the reason for describing them as quantifier phrases.

It’s probably clear that the phrases every president and no president, even though they are grammatically singular, do not serve the function of picking out a single object. But that may be less clear in the case of a president. Sentences containing quantifier phrases like a president and some president share with those containing definite descriptions, such as the president, the feature that they can be true because of a fact about a single object. For example, The first U. S. president wore false teeth and A president wore false teeth can be said to both be true because of a fact about Washington. The difference between the two sorts of expression can be seen by considering what might make such sentences false. If Washington had not worn false teeth, The first U. S. president wore false teeth would be false but A president wore false teeth might still be true. That’s because the second could be true because of facts about many different presidents (in many different countries), so its truth is not tied to facts about any one of them. If the expression a president is thought of as referring at all, its reference is an indefinite one. That is one reason for adding the qualification definite to the formula for individual terms given above, but this qualification also serves as a reminder that the presence of a definite article is a mark of an individual term while an indefinite article indicates a quantifier phrase.