  Kaplan’s theory does not ascribe characters or contents to utterances. Rather, it ascribes characters to linguistic expressions, and contents to expressions with respect to contexts. In fact, Kaplan’s theory ascribes contents to expressions with respect to contexts in which no one utters those expressions. For example, on Kaplan’s theory, the sentence ‘I exist’ has a content with respect to every context, and is true in every context, including contexts in which the agent does not utter that sentence, and including contexts in which no one in the world of the context speaks English. The sentence ‘I utter nothing’ is true in some contexts, on Kaplan’s theory, for there are contexts \(c\) in which the agent \(A\) of \(c\) utters nothing in the world of \(c\), and the content of the sentence in \(c\) is the proposition that \(A\) utters nothing, which is true in the world of \(c\). This is why Kaplan speaks of the agent of a context rather than the speaker of a context.