I argue that predicativism, the view that proper names are predicates, is a viable theory of the semantics of proper names given a certain hypothesis about the grammar of definiteness. Extant versions of predicativism hold that a singular name in argument position constitutes the predicative component of a covert definite description. I show that these versions cannot accommodate semantic and typological data, specifically: syntactic and semantic disparities between bare and non-bare occurrences of such names in English, the distinctive modal rigidity displayed by names, as opposed to common noun definite descriptions, and cross-linguistic data that feature seemingly distinct determiners for names in argument position. I propose that predicativism needs to embrace a view of definite marking as complex, consisting of a definite article and a bindable, familiarity-tracking constituent, which I call index. I show that this view is empirically motivated and typologically attested. The resulting version of predicativism can accommodate elegantly the observed semantic data when coupled with language-specific morpho-phonological generalizations. I finally address criticisms of and alternatives to my version of predicativism.

我认为，谓语主义，即专名是谓词的观点，是在给定关于确定性语法的某种假设的情况下专名语义的可行理论。现存版本的谓语主义认为，论证位置上的单数名称构成了隐秘的确定描述的谓语成分。我表明这些版本不能容纳语义和类型学数据，特别是：英语中此类名称的裸露和非裸露出现之间的句法和语义差异，名称所显示的独特模态刚性，而不是普通名词的明确描述，以及交叉语言数据具有看似不同的参数位置名称限定符。我建议谓语主义需要接受这样一种观点：明确标记是复杂的、索引. 我表明这种观点是有经验的动机和类型学的证明。当与特定于语言的形态语音概括相结合时，所得的谓语主义版本可以优雅地容纳观察到的语义数据。我最后提出了对我的预测主义版本的批评和替代方案。