holds for a single term whose meaning is either one or multiple. We do not concede that the point in dispute falls within what you have described. This classification is valid only when the expression is the same in both instances, whereas that is not the case here. The expressions at issue are ‘the back of the road,’ ‘its ridge,’ ‘the wing of a journey,’ and the like. Each such expression has only one meaning, not several different meanings. Wherever it occurs, its meaning is one, as with other names.
If you say, ‘But the words “back,” “ridge,” and “wing” have meanings other than these,’ the reply is:
‘The expression “the back of the road” or “its wing” is not the expression “the back of a human being,” “the wing of a bird,” or “the wings of the angels.” The words “the back” and “the road” are made definite by the definite article, which indicates a known referent denoted by the expression—the human back, for example. This is not like the expression “the back of the road”; rather, the two expressions differ.’
Thus one cannot say, ‘The expression occurs in a single context.’ More telling still, it is unanimously agreed that the word ‘back’ is used literally of all animals. Nevertheless, for many people, only the human back may immediately come to mind. They do not think of the back of a dog, a fox, a wolf, a weasel, an ant, or a louse. This is because the human back is what they picture and frequently refer to in their ordinary speech. When used with the definite article, the word refers to the familiar back.