ence; an experientially unverifiable sentence or "sentence" is meaningless. More specifically, a sentence's particular meaning is its verification condition, the set of possible experiences on someone's part that would tend to show that the sentence was true. The theory faces a number of objections: it has ruled a number of clearly meaningful sentences meaningless, and vice versa; it has assigned the wrong meanings to sentences that it does count as meaningful; and it has some dubi- ous presuppositions. But the worst objection is that, as Duhem and Quine have argued, individual sentences do not have distinctive verification condi- tions of their own. Quine went on to bite that bullet and infer that individual sentences do not have meanings; according to him there is no such thing as sentence meaning. Quine also attacked the formerly widespread view that some sentences are "analytic" in the sense of being true by definition or solely in virtue of the meanings of their component terms.
viidates võimalike vastuste hulga omadustele ning vastamise vormile. Märgis määrab, millist laadi infot küsimuse vastused sisaldama peavad ning kuidas tuleb vastus esitada: kas konkreetse vastusena või pikema selgitusena. Märgis võib esineda ilmutatud kujul küsisõnana (kas, mis, kus jne) või ilmutamata kujul, nt sõnade ümberpaigutamise kaudu lauses. Infot, mida vastajalt nõutakse, nimetatakse küsimuse objektiks. · Presupositsioonid (presuppositions) on väited, mis täpsustavad küsimuse asjaolusid ning väljendavad mingit infot, mida küsija peab tõeseks. Küsimus on mõttekas ainult juhul, kui presupositsioon on tõene. Mõnikord on presupositsioonid kirjeldatud küsilause tekstiga, mõnikord esitatakse need eraldi, kas enne või pärast küsilause esitamist. Küsija ei pruugi ise märgata, mis presupositsioonid tema küsimusega
annaabi.ee 
