The following text is from a philosophy of language article.
Referential and attributive uses of definite descriptions function differently. When I say "Smith's murderer is insane," I might refer to a specific person I have in mind (referential) or describe whoever satisfies the description (attributive). Donnellan's distinction challenged Russell's unified treatment of definite descriptions. The debate illuminates differences between semantics (what expressions literally mean) and pragmatics (what speakers intend to communicate).
Which choice best describes the overall structure of the text?
It explains a linguistic distinction and connects it to broader theoretical issues.
It provides rules for proper grammar usage.
It argues that Bertrand Russell was completely wrong.
It compares English grammar to that of other languages.
Correct Answer: A
Choice A is the best answer. The text explains Donnellan's referential/attributive distinction and connects it to semantics vs. pragmatics.
- Evidence: The text explains the distinction: "Referential and attributive uses... function differently... refer to a specific person... or describe whoever satisfies." It connects to broader issues: "illuminates differences between semantics... and pragmatics."
- Reasoning: The passage introduces a technical distinction in philosophy of language and explains its significance.
- Conclusion: The purpose is to explain distinction and connect to theory.
💡 Strategy: Summarize: This guy (Referential) vs. Whoever (Attributive). Meaning vs. Intent (Connection).
Choice B is incorrect because grammar rules aren't provided. Choice C is incorrect because Russell is challenged, not completely rejected. Choice D is incorrect because languages aren't compared.