Certain associated problems

pp. 77-102

in: Mohanty, Edmund Husserl's theory of meaning, Berlin, Springer, 1976

Abstract

It has been pointed out in § 12.I. that the ambiguities and fluctuations in meaning could be eliminated, for these pertain not to the meanings themselves but to our use of a seemingly identical physical expression. This explanation of the phenomena of ambiguity and fluctuation, howsoever plausible it may be in the case of expressions like "water,' "table,' "hand,' has much lesser chance of succeeding in the case of the so-called "occasional' expressions (or, "indexical' expressions or "ego-centric particulars') like "I' and "this.' Is it possible even in such cases to demonstrate the ideality of meaning amidst the change of persons and situations? Is the subjectivity and the equivocation attached to such expressions a dispensable accident? Is it possible, that is to say, to eliminate their ego-centricity? To find out Husserl's answer to such questions, we should follow him in his analysis of the so-called occasional expressions.¹