A problem for Predicativism not solved by Predicativism

Hawthorne & Manley 2012 observe that there is a clear contrast between (1) and (2): (1) In every race, the colt won. (2) In every race, John won. Whereas the colt in (1) has a co-varying reading, John in (2) does not. This is a problem for the so-called Predicativist view of names defended by e.g., Elbourne 2005, Matushansky 2006, 2008, Izumi 2013, and Fara 2015a,b,c. In a recent response to Hawthorne and Manley, Fara argues that this contrast is not only not a problem for her view, but it is in fact predicted by it. In other words, the existence of this contrast, according to Fara, provides an argument in favor of Predicativism. In this short discussion note, I show that Fara's response has significant shortcomings and that the contrast between (1) and (2) remains a considerable problem for the Predicativist view of names.