In this paper I investigate the nature of the relation between meaning-interdependence and analyticity. The theory within which meaning-interdependence reaches its peak and becomes omnipresent is meaning holism, according to which every two expressions are meaning-interdependent. A lot of people reject holism partially due to the impression that the theory leads to the picture in which language is self-sufficient in the sense that it is nothing but a game of meanings which is detached from reality. What stands behind that impression is probably something along the lines: analyticity stems from meaning-interdependence, so if all expressions are meaning-interdependent, then everything appears analytic. I defend holism from this kind of objection. I start with showing that analyticity traditionally understood cannot pour over language within holism, because it is not applicable to the theory at all. Then, I argue that adopting some weaker notion of analyticity leads to the ubiquity of analyticity indeed, but analyticity so understood is too weak to actually endanger holism. Finally, I demonstrate that the problems with analyticity appear only when meaning-interdependence is treated in extremely superficial way. I also propose a very simple hierarchy of meaning-interdependence, based on Pagin’s total-pair holism, which immediately repeal the ‘ubiquitous analyticity’ problem.

中文翻译：

---

无所不在的意义-相互依存和无处不在的分析性

在本文中，我研究了意义-相互依赖与分析性之间关系的性质。意义相互依赖达到顶峰并无所不在的理论是意义整体论，根据这个理论，每两个表达都是意义相互依赖的。许多人部分地拒绝整体论，部分原因是因为这样一种印象，即理论导致了图片是自给自足的，在某种意义上，语言不过是与现实脱节的意义游戏。这种印象背后的原因可能是大致的：分析性源于意义相互依存，因此，如果所有表达都是意义上相互依存的，那么所有事物都表现为分析性的。我反对这种反对。首先，我要说明的是，传统上理解的分析方法无法在整体论中超越语言，因为它根本不适用于该理论。然后，我认为采用一些较弱的分析性概念确实会导致分析性的普遍性，但是如此理解的分析性太弱了，无法真正危害到整体主义。最后，我证明只有以极其肤浅的方式对待意义相互依赖时，才会出现分析性问题。我还根据Pagin的全对整体论提出了一个非常简单的意义-相互依存的层次结构，该层次结构立即消除了“普遍存在的分析性”问题。我证明只有以极其肤浅的方式对待意义相互依赖时，才会出现分析性问题。我还根据Pagin的整体对整体论提出了一个非常简单的意义-相互依存的层次结构，该层次结构立即消除了“普遍存在的分析性”问题。我证明只有以极其肤浅的方式对待意义相互依赖时，才会出现分析性问题。我还根据Pagin的全对整体论提出了一个非常简单的意义-相互依存的层次结构，该层次结构立即消除了“普遍存在的分析性”问题。