This book is undeservedly out of print. What Mozart is to the symphony, Salmon is to direct reference theory. Clearly one of the most rigorous and thorough texts in analytic philosophy of language of the latter twentieth century, written by one of the finest minds who ever graced either the UCLA or Princeton campus. UCSB is lucky to have him. And I understand that the original manuscript was styled in quite legible handwriting (not to mention correct logical notation).

This text is essential reading for anyone interested in the philosophy of language (even Quine said so!), and it is a superb defense of what has been called "The Theory of Direct Reference." It is a clear exposition and analysis of the specifics pertinent to the theory, especially helpful is Section 3 in Ch 1 on Rigid Designation. And you thought 'obstinacy' was peculiar to feminism!

The first 150 pages of this book reads like the first 150 pages of Joyce's Ulysses--what a masterpiece! However, I must say that I think the formalizations in Part Four (on Putnam's Theory) are a bit showy.

If ever you require a text that discusses the fundamentals of Donnellan's Elucidations on (T9) or "The General K-Mechanism and the I-Mechanism," then this is the book for you.

Lastly, Salmon's book clearly discusses Putnam's Paradox. Very sexy. But I daresay that Michael Fletcher's MA thesis (CSULB) is also a good place to start for that particular discussion (although it's a bit descriptive, requiring more formalizations of the significant arguments).

This text is required reading, continuous with Naming and Necessity, and Kalish, Montague, and Marr: Formal Logic.

Enjoy. And now try to find yourself a copy. Good luck.

This text can jump start one's study of the most advanced topics in the philosophy of language in the analytic tradition. Traditional theories of reference are contrasted with the new direct theory of reference. It is argued that the direct theory (the causal theory of reference) does not really support belief in essences.

An outstanding work of unmistakable brilliance! Frege's Puzzle is THE philosophical problem of the latter half of the 20th C. (excluding world hunger and the brad pitt-gwyneth paltrow breakup). if you do not own and read this book (buy now!), then you will never know whether Lois Lane believes Clark Kent is really identical with Superman.

Russell thought that Frege's Puzzle was a pretty serious concern (he wore out several leisure suits worrying about it), and here Salmon defends what has been termed the Millian (who?) or naive theory of descriptions. It is a clear and rigorous case in favor of a semantics of direct reference and propositional attitudes.

This book is destined to become a classic, along with Moby-Dick, Hamlet, and 'Bugsy Wabbit.'