Abstract:

In Locke’s theory of language, direct correlation of signification is not between words and the objects but it is between the words and the ideas and there exists a compulsory internal contextual relationship among them.  For Locke, meaning is the idea in the mind of the person who is using that word. However, Berkeley does not accept this internal relationship and contextual correlation between words and ideas. He criticizes the idea of Locke’ that words will be generalized and gain a meaning by making them the sign of general ideas.   He does not completely reject abstraction at this phase, but he has a different view than Locke. He does not agree that general abstract ideas are compulsory for communication and information increase. One more point is that, for Berkeley the main function of language is not corresponding ideas or transmission of them as Locke thinks. According to him, language has pragmatic and verbal affective goals such as to arouse passion, to create or prevent behavioral tender.  He explains that the definition of word should be given without any dilemma and it is free of signification of ideas.  Besides, this two philosophers mentioned the functions of language and proposed solutions to eliminate ambiguities resulted by misusage of the language. In this framework, the purpose of this study is to present the correlation between meaning and idea in Locke’s and Berkeley’s view and to compare their ideas on the function of language.

Keywords: