DIVISIONS OF CONCEPTS AND TERMS. 63 



non-denotative. Are there any terms which are non-connotative 

 whose sole function is to point out or stand for things, with 

 out any reference to attributes? All concrete general terms and 

 all significant individual terms not only denote subjects but also 

 imply attributes and are therefore connotative. About proper 

 names, however, there has been much dispute owing to a con 

 fusion of the three distinct varieties of intension referred to 

 above (31). 



Every term which points out a thing to us and enables us 

 to identify it, must convey to our minds, by some psychological 

 process of suggestion or association of ideas, one or more attri 

 butes: and must, therefore, have subjective intension, or content. 

 This, therefore, is true even of the proper name. The latter un 

 doubtedly suggests all the attributes associated with the habitual 

 application of it to the individual that bears it 1 



Furthermore, since nothing is or can be entirely destitute of 

 attributes, and since their sum-total, known and unknown, forms, 

 in each case, the comprehension of the thing denoted by the name, 

 it follows that even proper names have comprehension. 



But since a proper name is not given to an individual by reason 

 of any attributes possessed by that individual, since its application 

 to the individual possessing it is not determined by selecting any 

 of those attributes and fixing on them as implied by it, but rather 

 by pointing out the individual possessing the name, it follows 

 necessarily that such names must be regarded as non-connotative! 1 



Of course it is often difficult to draw the line between what a proper 

 name suggests and what it might perhaps be claimed to imply. The difficulty 

 is not so great in the case of such proper names as &quot; Lake of Lucerne,&quot; 

 &quot; Major Jones,&quot; etc. the first part of each of these being manifestly conno 

 tative, i.e. applied to the individual in question because of the possession of a 

 certain attribute ; the second part being non-connotative. Nor does any real 

 difficulty arise from the fact that most if not all proper names were originally 

 applied to individuals by reason of certain attributes possessed by those 

 individuals. The names were then of course significant or connotative. 

 &quot; Maynooth &quot; meant &quot; The Plain of Nuad &quot;. The first &quot; John Smith &quot; was 

 probably so called because he plied the trade of smith. &quot; Wednesday &quot; 



1 All the known individualizing attributes or characteristics are regarded by Mr. 

 Joseph as meant or implied by the proper name, which he therefore holds to be con 

 notative (op. cit., p. 138). 



a In a certain sense proper names and designations are not terms at all inas 

 much as their mental equivalent is not properly an intellectual concept (which is 

 always theoretically abstract and universal) but rather a mental combination of the 

 abstract concept with a percept or imagination image of an individual. C/. JOSEPH, 

 op. cit., p. 67. 



