For there are problems in philosophy that are not concerned with the meaning of "meaning", though perhaps with the meaning of other words, e.g., "time".
Attending to the way the meaning of a sentence is explained makes clear the connection between meaning and verification.
Ipsissimæ res. I think this must have been Bacon's meaning, though not a meaning which the word can properly bear.
We may give somewhat more precision to the above account of the meaning of images, and extend it to meaning in general.
For the original statement doesn't merely tell us that 'und' and 'and' have the same meaning, it is, in some way, designed to give this very meaning -- which 'nein' (in G) means the same as 'nyet' (in R) clearly does not.
It is sameness-of-meaning and difference-in-meaning that are primary according to this view; meanings are mere reifications of these relations.
One isn't thinking out loud that-p unless one knows the meaning of the sounds one utters, and this knowing the meaning isn't a matter of utterances and propensities to utter.
The Myth of the Structure One of the common way to avoid this ‘intractability of meaning’ is to move the concept of meaning to the periphery of one’s teaching and to concentrate on the word struture.
The Indeterminacy of Meaning One of the basic characteristics of the structural approach, as contrasted with the semiotic one, is the fact that it leads to the notion of meaning that is in a sense indeterminate or relativistic.
If the verification gives the meaning, is part of the meaning left out?