Structural Hermeneutics updated
I'm now calling my basic thesis a theorem, because I'm offering a proof for it: I'm not convinced, though, that assertions and meaning are isomorphic (as Wittgenstein claims in his "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus"), but I'm sharing Wittgenstein's view in "Philosophische Untersuchungen", 496:
Grammatik sagt nicht, wie die Sprache gebaut sein muss, um ihren Zweck zu erfüllen, um so und so auf Menschen zu wirken. Sie beschreibt nur, aber erklärt in keiner Weise, den Gebrauch der Zeichen.
(Grammar does not tell how language has to be build to reach its goal, to affect people so and so. It just describes - but in no way explains - the usage of signs.)
We have the reason for this here: for handling formal issues, a strucural view on meaning is necessary. I think, I can show that meaning has an infinite cardinality like each real class has; if you're interested, you can read my Structural Hermeneutics.
BTW: because proposition is a real class, and perception is one, too, language is the only part of the semiotic triangle, which is countable.