Meanings

I do believe that the meaning of words have much to do with the actual connection between the words naming objects and the objective factuality of the beings and things named.

Linguists are too subjective, too context limiting. Many English words or nouns have synonyms. The specific world corresponding to the being named may not be the only word that could be identified with that externallly existing creature, but it is objectively serving as the universal name applied to that creature, and, as such serve as a one to one link of the universal, Platonic archetype to the existing creature to the noun naming the creature.

Language may not look like the things that they name. Language may not pictorially match what is named in the external world. There may not be an isomorphic bond between the naming noun and the objects named in objective reality.

But, there is links between naming nouns, and entities named and indentified, all the way up to the existing Platonic archetype, or something like it. The Ideal World exists. God exists. Ideas exist.

The linguistic analysts and atheistic, secular nominalists cannot have it all their own way, nor are they correct beyond some helpful reminders for us metaphysically and epistemologically that moderate the sweeping, grandiose claims made by Idealists, and those that claim to possess and wield absolute truth.