Another experiment dealt with the combinatorial properties of “meaning” in the formation of “assigns” [...]. The study is too crude, from a linguistic point of view, [...] for it presupposes only that assigns are “associated” with primary signs (i.e., elements of the definiens), without stating anything about the structure of this association [Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J., and Tannenbaum Percy H., 1957, ‘The Measurement of Meaning’, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, p. 287], and depending only on the primitive notion of "assertion".
- Weinreich (1958), a pag.362

n. 10 […] However, "the vast majority of signs used in ordinary communication are what we may term 'assigns'—their meanings are literally "assigned" to them via association with other signs" [Osgood, Charles E., Suci, George J., and Tannenbaum Percy H., 1957, ‘The Measurement of Meaning’, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, p. 8].
- Weinreich (1958), a pag.358