I see your point. It's been a very long time since I've read the original text, but I don't remember this being my impression of the argument being made, and th

I see your point. It's been a very long time since I've read the original text, but I don't remember this being my impression of the argument being made, and that would indeed be a very simplistic one. But I might be mixing it up with some of the debates on semantics within linguistics, which is of course a slightly different topic.