Explain and assess the view that proper names are directly referential: Literature & Language Essay

Explain and assess the view that proper names are directly referential
Name of the Class (Course)
Professor (Tutor)
The Name of the School (University)
The Date
Introduction
Throughout history, there has been a metamorphosis in how we refer to things and other people. There has even been a point in time when symbols were used to refer to objects. For instance, when one wanted to refer to a tree, they would draw an image of a tree. The hieroglyphs are good examples of such kind of communication. Since then, there have been developments in language use until now when the human race can create names and refer to things by themselves. 
When people talk about ‘man’, they refer to adult males. When we talk about ‘Donald Trump’, we particularly talk about an individual, and in this case, the United States 45th president. Numerous classifications have also been placed on different word forms in an attempt to remove ambiguity on their intended meanings. The Proper name, which is commonly referred to as ‘name’, has become a bone of contention among various scholars of referential linguistics. Many proponents have chipped into the discussion to alleviate the confusion. These scholars have also purposed to give insightful ideologies on what ‘names’ are, yet there is still a wide gap left within this scope of the study. In this task, I will defend what I take to be the right tenets, not wholly but critically.
Understanding the variations on Fregean and Russellian themes as a more advanced way that will help understand the referring ability of proper names. In this assessment, I will be arguing on proper names as being directly referential. Consider this instance;
1. The name ‘Donald Trump’ refers to the current president of the United States, 
2. ‘The Amazon’ refers to the Americas’ longest river 
3. ‘Everest’ is the highest mountain on earth. 
From (1), Donald Trump is indeed the sitting president of America. There are also other people known as Donald Trump, including his son. From (2) the Amazon refers to the longest river in the world, that is undisputed, and whenever a person mentions it, we all think of the river. However, there is the Amazon rainforest/jungle in South America too. Lastly, (3) refers to a very prominent geographical feature, the tallest mountain. The mountain was named after a prominent figure, colonel Everest, a British surveyor from the 19th century.
At face value, the above assertions appear to be simple syntactical conclusions as they refer to particular things or individuals making them proper nouns. The same words hold a deeper meaning concerning the description. These non-static nature render the proper nouns ambiguous. Therefore, I will focus on the various views held by different theorists about proper names being direct referential words. I will emphasize the descriptivist theory.
According to The Merriam Webster Dictionary, a proper noun is defined as a noun that designates a particular being or thing, does not take a limiting modifier, and is usually capitalized in English - called also proper name. Proper nouns tend to fall only as a subclass of a wider definable class. Most proper nouns do not fall under the same class of syntax for example; Google and Jeep. Just like other nouns, proper nouns can be freely pluralized. These plural denotations do not affect the proper nouns semantically.
Proponents of classical descriptivism theories (Gottlob, 1952) and (Russell, 1911) have it that specific descriptive content is only associated with the use of a name, whose contents are alluded by the mind of the speaker. Therefore, for a name to be said as a referent to an object, its descriptive content must be unique to whatever the name itself is referring to. I agree with the idea that a proper name is directly related to the thing it particularly refers to. However, the meaning does not have to be subjective, in that I can only give the meaning, or use a word as I may like, depending on what I think the meaning is. This reference should accompany a set of repertoire that will identify with the individual being referred to easily. The unique characteristic is the one that will make the object or person what they are regarded as, and as pertains to proper names, the characteristics should be obvious (p.108-128). 
Example A:
A speaker uses the name ‘A’ to successfully refer to specific individual ‘b’. Descriptivism posits that the speaker believes characteristic X is unique to that individual ‘A’, and that whenever you realize attribute ‘X’, then that must be in fact individual ‘b’. (X-is a sort of DNA connotation, a particular repertoir...