Literary Theories

Yasir Mutlib Abdulla, PhD candidate

Reading Plato’s Cratylus

Cratylus is the name of a dialogue by Plato. Most modern scholars agree that it
was written mostly during Plato's so-called middle period. In the
dialogue, Socrates is asked by two men, Cratylus and Hermogenes, to tell them
whether names are "conventional" or "natural", that is, whether language is a
system of arbitrary signs or whether words have an intrinsic relation to the things
they signify. Socrates explains that merely understanding the names of things is not
the same as understanding the nature of things. In order to assign names to things,
we must already have attained some knowledge of those things. We may attain
knowledge of things either directly by investigating the things themselves or
indirectly by investigating the names of things (angelfire.com)

The central topic of the dialogue is about the concept of the names. The dialogue
argues the ‘correctness of names’, a hot topic in the late fifth century BC when the
dialogue has its dramatic setting. It is a kind of hot theoretical debate about what
criteria determines the correct choice of name for any given object. In
the Cratylus the process of questioning and answering by the interlocutors serves
as two opposed dialectics to search for meaning.

This debate focuses more on the use of language and forms that tackles the generic
use of nouns in Greek language. The positions of Hermogenes and Cratylus have
come to be known to modern scholarship as ‘conventionalism’ and ‘naturalism’
respectively (Stanford Encyclopedia.com). According to this debate the linguistic

1
function of language can further be broaden to include the notion of the signifiers
and the signified. The debate between the conventionalists and the naturalists seem
rooted in the Greek times.

Linguistic conventionalist adherents like Hermogenes would see that the local or
national convention determines the signifying functions of words depending on the
use of the objects. Under the influence of the conventions, the objects could
acquire different names derived from the assigned functions. More than one name
may be assigned to the same thing, and names may vary in the degree of their
similarity or difference in form and meaning. The naturalist Adherents like
Cratylus, on the other hand, would contradict this principle by claiming that names
cannot be arbitrarily chosen in the way that conventionalism describes or
advocates, because names belong naturally to their specific objects (Sanford
Encyclopedia.com). Accordingly, speaking of some objects with arbitrary names
other than its natural names assigned to them, fails to refer to their correct
signifying function.

Via Socrates, Plato further criticizes arbitrariness in defense of the naturalistic

view of naming. The discussion is long and includes a debate on the etymology of
important Greek names. The application of the etymological theory of names leads
Socrates to admit that some existing names cannot correctly, perfectly as well as
definitely denote to the objects they signify. The suitable way to solve the debate
under questioning is to ascribe some conventional elements together with the
naturalists’ view of names.

2
Works cited:

1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Plato’s Cratylus”. Thu Aug 23, 2018.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-cratylus/. Accessed 16 Nov. 2020.
2. “Plato’s Cratylus”. www.angelfire.com. Accessed 16 Nov. 2020.