Translate the following text, and give your own discussion on the relationship between sense and reference. Leech uses SENSE as a briefer term for conceptual meaning. This usage is justifiable in that as a technical term “sense” may be used in the same way as “connotation” is used in philosophy. It may refer to the properties an entity has. In this usage, “sense” is equivalent to “concept”. The definition of desk as “a piece of furniture with a flat top and four legs, at which one reads and writes” may also be called the sense of desk. So the distinction between “sense” and “reference” is comparable to that between “connotation” and “denotation”. The former refers to the abstract properties of an entity, while the latter refers to the concrete entities having these properties. In other words, Leech's conceptual meaning has two sides: sense and reference. There is yet another difference between sense and reference. To some extent, we can say every word has a sense, i.e. some conceptual content; otherwise we will not be able to use it or understand it. But not every word has a reference. Grammatical words like but, if, and do not refer to anything. And words like God, ghost and dragon refer to imaginary things, which do not exist in reality. Therefore people suggest that we should study meaning in terms of sense rather than reference.