Consider the following sentences:
(a) ‘Rabbits are animals’ is a true sentence of my language iff rabbits are animals.
(b) The word ‘rabbit’ refers in my language to an object iff that object is a rabbit.
Scott Soames says “The propositions expressed by these sentences are standardly not regarded as capable of being known apriori.” He has an argument for their a posteriority, which I may blog about later. But what I’m wondering is: does anyone know of any other discussions of the epistemic status of such propositions? Or even of other places where someone takes a stand (perhaps without extensive discussion) on their epistemic status?
Also feel free to state any strong feelings you might have about whether they're a priori.