 If, on the other hand, there are many homonyms, then each may be allocated its own semantic convention, independently determining its particular referent (see Kripke 1980: 7–8; Kaplan 1990). It is reasonable to say, then, that the uniquely denoting name is a technical innovation meeting a specific theoretical need in semantics. Alternative terminology employed with the same goal in mind, but a greater reluctance to embrace genuine homonymy, includes “use” (Strawson 1950), “name-using practice” (Evans 1982), “naming convention” (Matushansky 2008: 592; Recanati 1997), and even “discourse entity” (Cumming 2014).