Analytic languages and their function. (7)

[Salinas17 at aol.com]

In a message dated 5/29/06 9:19:41 PM, lise.menn at colorado.edu writes:
<< very often it is necessary to be carefully agnostic on the issue of what a 
child's utterance means in itself, as opposed to what the child means by 
saying it.  >>

Let's start with two categories of "meaning":
-- what an utterance means to the speaker
-- what an utterance means to the listener(s)

Somehow, we've got a third kind of meaning described here -- 
"what a child's utterance means in itself, as opposed to what a child means 
by saying it"

What makes us think there is such a thing as "what an utterance means in 
itself"?

Regards
Steve Long