 Church (1956b) noted that instead of making the final step from possible thoughts to propositions, we might claim that truth and falsehood attach to possible sentences of some language—those that the syntactical rules of the language allow as well formed. He added that this move won’t serve the nominalist like Goodman—who denies propositions because they are abstract—since the move also invokes abstract types. Further, and for the reasons discussed in  §3.3,  if we abandon nominalism but continue to limit our ontology to possible sentences, then our semantic theory will provide a false analysis of attributions of assertion and belief.