ABSTRACT
Linguistic analysis is the use of a certain method to achieve a certain goal. But it is appropriate to use a method to achieve a goal only if the method is capable of achieving the goal. So linguistic analysis is appropriate only if the method of hypothetical cases is capable of generating a priori knowledge of necessary truths. If the theses about meaning and linguistic understanding presupposed by the classical foundation for linguistic analysis are true, then linguistic analysis seems to have a solid foundation. On the other hand, linguistic analysis lacks a foundation if a semantically externalist view of the same terrain is true instead. The distinction between possible worlds considered as counterfactual and possible worlds considered as actual enables a distinction to be drawn between two kinds of necessary truth. The two-dimensional account of how the method of hypothetical cases can yield a priori knowledge faces a problem.
