ABSTRACT
Known since ancient times and made more precise in formal logic of the twentieth century, the terms ‘object language’ and ‘metalanguage’ form a useful distinction for talking about different levels of propositions. Propositions about non-linguistic states of affairs, for example, London is situated on the Thames is a proposition in the object language, while ‘London’ is a proper name of two syllables is an example of metalanguage. In a metalinguistic description, the example in the object language is marked graphemically by quotation marks, italics, or underlining. This convention corresponds to the language-philosophical distinction between use and mention. In London is situated on the Thames the expression London is being used to name a specific English city, while in ‘London’ is a proper name of two syllables one is citing, or mentioning the word London as an example of a proper name. This metalinguistic hierarchical distinction can be drawn over several levels, thus the definitions and explanations of this dictionary entry (or of the whole dictionary itself) are metametalinguistic descriptions of the metalinguistic use of linguistic terminology that is used to describe expressions in the object language. Two languages are in an objectlanguage-metalanguage relation if statements about expressions in the one language are made in the other language, such as might be found in an English language grammar of German. The differentiation between levels of propositions is necessary to avoid socalled semantic antinomies, like those of the paradox of the Cretan who maintains ‘All Cretans are liars.’
