Naming: Speaker's Identification and Its Relationship to the Named and Naming."

Abstract

Abstract: This article revolves around the relationship between the name, the named, and naming among speakers. It aims to uncover the linguistic arguments surrounding this issue by analyzing the argumentative axes of each argument and understanding their fixed and variable argumentative strategies and variables. The dissociative argument, therefore, relies on the following principles: the name negates and contradicts the named; the name aligns with naming; what applies to names applies to attributes as well, and the process of naming and description is subject to the logic of placement, reason, and analogy rather than transmission. Entities created and those with a creator are equal in the process of naming. Consequently, the relationship between the name and the named is characterized by contrast, difference, and indirectness. Thus, names are generated according to an open possibility logic where there is no room for cessation or prohibition.

These semiotic principles form the essence of the dissociative argument and its theoretical and methodological constants. However, they will arouse the attention of linguistic sects like the Ash'aris, who will seek through their theoretical, methodological, and argumentative tools to criticize the foundations of this argument, refute its principles, rebel against its results, and invalidate, contradict, and undermine its semiotic constants. They will present an alternative argument framed within a semiotic framework that provides outputs contradicting those of the dissociative argument. According to the Ash'aris, the name is not just a linguistic symbol but a sign directly indicating its referent and serving as the attribute describing entities. What applies to its rulings applies to the self; thus, the name is the named, and there cannot be contrast or contradiction between them. In contrast, the name contradicts and negates naming.