Against the Metaphysical Transparency of Semantic Adicity
The argument of previous chapters is generalized from referring expressions to argument-taking expressions more generally. The focus is on potential mismatches between what I call the semantic (and syntactic) adicity of argument-taking linguistic expressions and the objective or metaphysical adicity of real-world properties and relations. Two main arguments are offered, the argument from underarticulation and the argument from cross-linguistic variation. It is argued that where there are such mismatches, we should not expect a priori semantic analysis to be a reliable guide to bridging such gaps and so should not expect a priori semantic analysis to reveal much about the metaphysical adicity of real-world properties, events, states, and relations.