ABSTRACT
This final version of the account suffers from neither a Benacerraf nor a grainsize problem. Indeed, it strikes me as a plausible account of the nature of the proposition that Sophie swims. But notice that what has been given up is any direct appeal to syntax as a basis for propositional unity. It is true that syntactic relation X still appears in the formulation of SWIMS-4, but here X could be any syntactic relation at all, so long as it can encode instantiation. On this revised account, it is clear that it is not syntax, but rather the property of encoding instantiation that really unifies the proposition. In fact, now that all appeal to particular syntactic relations has been excised from the account, there is no restriction on the kind of thing X can be – it merely needs to relate the lexical items and to encode instantiation; otherwise, it needn’t be recognizably ‘syntactic’.
