Argues that no ordinary language idiom, not “there is” or “there are,” not “exists,” as a matter of semantics, implies ontological commitment. Nevertheless, ordinary speakers understand what ontological commitment is and (to some extent) understand when they want to be so committed to something. Ordinary understanding of ontological commitment, despite the absence of explicit idioms communicating the idea, is expressed by context, stress, rhetorical enhancers, and other devices.
Keywords: ontological commitment, “exists,” ordinary language, rhetorical enhancers, “there are,” “there is,” vernacular,