From metaphysics to semantics. On justifying the analyticity claims

Abstract

The article discusses W. V. O. Quine’s critique of the classical distinction ‘analytic vs. synthetic sentences’. The author claims that the debate concerning this distinction is essential for semantic and lexicographic analysis, which nowadays must face certain well known metaphysical problems. She discusses five strategies of argumentation formed against Quine’s position, including four explicit definitions of analyticity. The author claims that A. Bogusławski’s (1998) definition seems to be the most effective one, and the same time closest to Kant’s approach. This definition can be adopted in order to verify claims on the analyticity of propositions which include two predicates under discussion.