Following the hints of the Italian positive existentialist Nicola Abbagnano of the instrumentalist theory of language, the author states its advantages over the naturalist and conventionalist theories of language, and includes into the theory Marx’s marginal remarks on language, because they verify two of its basic components: (1) that the instrumental character of language reisulte from the selection which is conditioned by the type of production, (2) that communicative effectiveness is the result of the adaptation to the instrumental propose of language, A critical consideration of the theory of meaning in three of its basic interpretations (syntactical meaning, semantic meaning, meaning as use) and in the explanation of the genesis of meaning (pragmatic, behaviouristic, operational, dialectic) as well as especial consideration of the latest views of the analytical school of meaning as use (a critique of the radical refereces of Strawson and Quine) - have all proved that the problem of meaning is contained in the relation of oonnotation and denotation, a vague idea of which was expressed in 19th century by the Croatian mathematical logician A. Nad. Having demonstrated Marx’s critique of radical reference, the author states that the task of the instrumentalist theory of language is to develop as soon as possible a theory of meaning in terms of interrelations of connotation and denotation, continuing the above-mentioned tradition-all of which would be of use not only to the philosophy of language that would thus realise a systemic theory, but also to linguistic semantics where such deficiency is strongly felt. Namely, although transformative - generative grammar in its latest stage is all the more in favour of treating meaning as a oomnotative-denotative relation (Lakoff, Fillmore, etc.), owing to the lack of a systemic theory of language, the basic terms of generative grammar are not sufficiently grounded (choice, possibility, use, communication) and its relation to structuralism is insufficiently defined.
