Realism beyond correspondence

This paper argues that correspondence theories of truth, despite claiming to be realist, are in fact best understood as idealist. They take propositions to be made true by states of affairs or tropes, things which have to be understood in terms of sentential structure. I argue that the only defensible explanation of the view that propositions and the world share sentential structure is that the world has this structure because it is the structure of language, which is idealist. I argue that a realist should abandon correspondence theories, and I defend the idea of a non-correspondence realism from some objections