REPLY TO PROFESSOR BURES.

To begin with, I should like to express my gratitude to Professor Bures for his thoughtful reading of my book and for the cooperative and scientific spirit of his critique. He is right in saying that at present there is imperfect understanding between general semanticists and many logicians. Indeed, there have been few discussions of general semantics from philosophical quarters which display, to the degree that Mr. Bures's paper does, the desire to criticize helpfully.

I could have wished, of course, that Mr. Bures had included in his discussion a consideration of the writings of Korzybski, Wendell Johnson, Benjamin Lee Whorf, and others whose names are familiar in general semantics literature. My writings come considerably short of treating all the important points in general semantics; the consideration of other writings might well have resolved for Mr. Bures problems which I have left unclarified. But his decision to limit the discussion to one 'representalive' book in the field has the advantage of putting the responsibility for a reply squarely on one person. So I shall do what I can in the hope that my remarks may advance the endeavors Mr. Bures has initiated to bring logicians and general semanticists to a better understanding. Such understanding seems highly desirable since general semantics owes, as Korzybski often said, some of its basic formulations to modem logic....

S. I. HAYAKAWA