ABSTRACT
P. F. Strawson considers two attempts made by W. V. O. Quine to explain the idea of singular term and general term in predicative position, ideas which play a central role in the theory of canonical notation. Quine rejects the notation involving 'range indicators', in favour of the notation involving the variables of quantification and predicates only. The thesis that Quine's notion of 'referential position' and, more generally, the contrast between singular and general terms in predication is able to be explained, that is, elucidated, analysed, in such a way rests on an assumption which is incompatible with his fundamental doctrine. That assumption is that Quine recognises a class of singular symbols, namely the definite singular symbol which is such that it may play the role of identifying an individual. But Quine may require no such class of singular symbols and hence Strawson may only claim to have 'explained' Quine's distinction at the expense of committing him to an inconsistency.
