 What motivates the identity theory of truth? It can be viewed as a response to difficulties that seem to accrue to at least some versions of the correspondence theory (cf. Dodd 2008a: 120, 124). The correspondence theory of truth holds that truth consists in a relation of correspondence between something linguistic or quasi-linguistic, on the one hand, and something worldly on the other. Generally, the items on the worldly end of the relation are taken to be facts or (obtaining) states of affairs. For many purposes these two latter kinds of entity (facts, obtaining states of affairs) are assimilated to one another, and that strategy will be followed here. The exact nature of the correspondence theory will then depend on what the other relatum is taken to be. The items mentioned so far make available three distinct versions of the correspondence theory, depending on whether this relatum is taken to consist of declarative sentences, Fregean thoughts, or Russellian propositions. Modern correspondence theorists make a distinction between truth-bearers, which would typically fall under one of these three classifications, and  truth-makers,[4]  the worldly entities making truth-bearers true, when they are true. If these latter entities are facts, then true declarative sentences, Fregean thoughts, or Russellian propositions—whichever of these one selects as the relata of the correspondence relation on the language side of the language–world divide—correspond to facts in the sense that facts are what make those sentences, thoughts, or propositions true, when they are true. (Henceforth we shall normally speak simply of thoughts and propositions, understanding these to be Fregean thoughts and Russellian propositions respectively, unless otherwise specified.)