What's in a Name? - Plato's Cratylus

-Plato's (c. 427-347 BC) dialogue "Cratylus" attempts to tackle the question- "How do words have meaning?"
   -For example, how do seemingly random noises come to have meaning to certain people, but not to others?
-The dialogue is named after Cratylus, a radical student of Heraclitus.
   -Took Heraclitus' concepts even further; for example, he (Cratylus) argued that you can't even stand in the same river ONCE!
   -The other two main characters in the dialogue are Socrates and Hermogenes (a close friend of Socrates' and a fellow philosopher).
   -The story starts with Cratylus and Hermogenes arguing about words and their meaning.
      -Hermogenes says that meaning comes from a person or group that associates a noise with meaning, and over time this spreads and more people associate the noise with meaning and so on.
         -Cratylus, however, argues that words have their meaning NATURALLY.
            -Argues that everything has a "correct" or "true" name.  If you don't use the right word, it's like you haven't even said anything.  His ultimate goal was to prove that you can't say anything false.
            -Socrates challenges this concept by saying that words are just tools, and that we use words to talk about shit but these concepts have a true nature that we lack the insight to truly recognize.  He also rambles on about etymologies and stuff.
               -There's also some possible hints that actually this is kind of a comedy piece and isn't meant to be taken completely seriously, or is just a parody...but this is unclear.
            -Anyway, Socrates does admit that the Greeks use some words that have crept in from foreign languages, and that the modern language has become "corrupted".
               -Hermogenes then asks how the root words got their meanings.
                  -Socrates defaults to an onomatopoeic explanation for this.  However, he then flips and begins to challenge Cratylus.
                     -Words may get their meaning naturally, but maybe this also isn't entirely true.  For example, words become corrupted over time, but still retain the same meaning.  Therefore, Socrates seems to argue that words acquire their meaning through both nature and convention.
                        -Therefore, it IS possible to say something falsely.
                           -Socrates then goes on to say that we use words to communicate our intentions, but words can also give us a hint into their true nature.
                           -Socrates then refutes Heraclitianism (everything is in flux) due to his own Theory of the Forms, which represents eternal stability.