Prābhākara thinkers deny that the meaning of a “cow” is a universal and that indication is necessary to shift the generic referent of the noun to a particular. Śālikanātha argues that while it may be true that something the same is remembered in each case when someone says “cow,” this remnant of memory is not the same thing as a word meaning (PS: 381ff, Ollett 2020b). Meaning has to do with the role that a word’s cognition plays within a sentence. Further, he argues that a word conveys the universal and the particular together, since the first cannot be understood without the second. So, while he agrees with the Bhāṭṭas that a series of universals cannot be connected together in a qualificative relationship, he concludes that this is a reason to reject the view that words primarily communicate generalities (sāmānya), arguing that they must communicate a qualified thing (viśeṣana).