The translation of both ‘bedeuten’ and ‘Bedeutung’ in Frege's works remains sufficiently problematic that some contemporary authors prefer to leave these words untranslated. Here a case is made for returning to Russell's initial choice of ‘to indicate’ and ‘indication’ as better alternatives than the more usual ‘meaning’, ‘reference’, or ‘denotation’. It is argued that this choice has the philosophical payoff that Frege's controversial doctrines concerning the semantic values of sentences and predicative expressions are rendered far more comprehensible by it, and that this translational strategy fulfills the desiderata of offering a translation which is acceptable both before and after Frege introduced the distinction between sense and reference or, as this paper would have it, between the sense of an expression and what it indicates.

中文翻译：

---

表示“Bedeutung”的翻译

弗雷格作品中“bedeuten”和“Bedeutung”的翻译仍然存在很大问题，以至于一些当代作家更愿意不翻译这些词。这里有一个案例是为了回到罗素最初选择的“指示”和“指示”作为比更常见的“意义”、“指称”或“外延”更好的选择。有人认为，这种选择具有哲学上的回报，即弗雷格关于句子和谓语表达的语义价值的有争议的学说通过它变得更容易理解，并且这种翻译策略满足了提供前后都可接受的翻译的愿望。弗雷格介绍了意义和指称之间的区别，或者如本文所描述的那样，在表达的意义和它所指的东西之间进行了区分。