This has a couple of awkward consequences. For one, it follows that denials of existence cannot be made with empty names: “Odysseus never existed” is neither true nor false. But perhaps these denials won't much be missed, since we can always say instead that the name ‘Odysseus’ doesn't refer. For another, sentences with fictional names are always ontologically committing. But, ultimately, it is the ontological commitment of persons that we care about, not sentences. A person may use a sentence containing a singular term—for example, an actor on the stage—without inheriting the sentence's ontological commitments. Only when a person judges the sentence to be true is she committed to an object as referent of the singular term, and to the kinds of entity to which the object belongs.