ABSTRACT
MY contention that the indicative sentence ‘I am asleep’ has no sense may appear to be challenged by the fact that its negation ‘I am not asleep’ does have sense. If the latter has a significant use so must the former, it might be argued. But the general principle that would be assumed has many exceptions. Suppose that a teacher calls the roll every day and when a student’s name is called he is required to report his presence by saying ‘Here’. When the teacher calls a name without getting a response she writes the words ‘Not here’ under the name in her roll book. One day the class wit answers ‘Not here’ and everyone laughs. There is a provision for the use of ‘Here’ to report one’s presence but of course no provision for the use of ‘Not here’ to report one’s absence. The example presents an accurate analogy with our problem. ‘I am asleep’, said by anyone, has the same absurdity as ‘Not here’ said by the pupil. Anyone who understands the use of ‘Here’ cannot suppose that ‘Not here’ might be a correct response to the calling of his name, even if he said it to himself. Likewise anyone who understands the normal use of ‘I am not asleep’ cannot think that it would ever be right to say ‘I am asleep’ even to himself.
