The article discusses the views of philosopher Donald Davidson on the topic of meaning and metaphor, comparing them to those of philosopher Charles Peirce. An argument is presented that Davidson's arguments depend on a distinction between conveying and causing meaning, and that this distinction is collapsed by Peirce’s theory of signs. The causal processes which are involved in any kind of meaning are discussed in terms of Peirce's semiotic reasoning, and additional reasons for rejecting Davidson's argument about the cognitive significance of metaphors are adduced.