 Even if name attribution is not the right way to ground metalinguistic predicates, any use theory, in attempting to explain the reference of a name in terms of (distinct) features of its use, will have to employ something of the sort. In that sense, use theories and metalinguistic theories are in the same boat. Of course, what ends up working for one won’t necessarily work for the other. However, it does not seem that the metalinguistic theory is uniquely afflicted by a circularity objection, but rather both theories stand in need of a suitable reductive base (for related discussion, see Burge 1973: 428; Geurts 1997: 326–327; Bach 2002: 83; Fara 2011; Gray 2014; Rami 2014: 858; García-Carpintero 2017: 25).