________________
OF SENTENCES
371
using it means to signify, otherwise we misunderstand it. As Dr. Stebbing' observes : “A bearer understands a word used by a speaker when he is referred to that which the speaker intended to indicate to him." But for the speaker's intention a word cannot have different meanings in different contexts. Hence we cannot ignore the aspect of intention in the meaning of a word. In fact the Vedāntists have to recognise it in the case of equivocal words which may have two meanings if it be so intended by the speaker or the writer It is also indirectly admitted by them when they say that the tātparyya of a word depends on the context (prakarana) in which it is used.
2. The meaning of a sentence
A vākya or a sentence is a combination of padas or words, which conforms to certain conditions. Just as words mean objects, so sentences mean the relations of objects. A sentence bears à certain meaning like the constituent words. Hence the question here arises · How are the meanings of the separate words constituting a sentence related to that of the sentence as a whole ? Is the meaning of a sentence merely the sum of the meanings of its words ? Or, is it something new, but determined by the meanings of the component words ? Or again, does a sentence convey a meaning of its own independently of the words constituting it ?
One theory of the relation between the meaning of a sentence and those of its constituent words is known as abhihritānvaya-vāda. According to it, the meaning of a sentence is merely the synthesis (anvaya) of the meanings of the separate words composing it When we read or hear a sentence we have first an understanding of the
1 Logic in Practice, p 66
