1 Correction to: Synthese https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02899-3

The original publication has been corrected. Prime marks were missing in several instances and these have been added to the following sentences:

In P3a′, ‘it’ is non-referential. It does not refer to some x such that x is raining: it does not commit us to saying that ∃x(Rx).

In P3b′, there is some x such that x is blue. In this way, P3b′ tracks P3b.

On the bottom of pg. 2 (very last line), it says “…well assume…”. It should read: “…we'll assume…”.

On pg. 7, right below where we introduce (P3a’), there is a sentence that starts like this: “In (P3a)…”. This is wrong. It should say this: “In (P3a’)…”. In other words, a single prime mark should be added.

Also on pg. 7, in the very same sentence just noted, a semicolon is missing. It should read like this: “It does not refer to some x such that x is raining; it does not…” [Please note that the ‘P3a’ after “Thus” following this sentence is correct.] Also on pg. 7, in the very same sentence just noted, a semicolon is missing. It should read like this: “It does not refer to some x such that x is raining; it does not…” [Please note that the ‘P3a’ after “Thus” following this sentence is correct.].

On pg. 7 as well, right below where we introduce (P3b’), there is a sentence that starts like this: “In (P3b)…”. This is wrong. It should say this: “In (P3a’)…”. In other words, a single prime mark should be added. Later on this very same line, there is a sentence that says: “In this way, P3b tracks P3b.” This is wrong, and should instead read as follows: “In this way, P3b’ tracks P3b.” So a single prime mark should be added, but only to the first instance of ‘P3b’.