This just fixes the reference but does not determine what the nature of these things is. Russellian in that I take propositions to be structured complexes, which have features, and, in the case of singular thoughts, particulars, as constituents. I see logical or structural traits as embedded in nature, in this sense, rather than as existing in some nonspatiotemporal realm, as would be the case on a Platonist view. No, just the reverse. I think you can only account for language in terms of human capabilities such as tracking objects, fixing beliefs about items discriminated in our environment which beliefs can then be a possible ground of action, etc.
Language presupposes other capabilities.
For example, let's suppose you're traveling in an arid plain somewhere in southern Africa, with a native person as your guide. I agree with you about that. This could be regarded as abductive in nature.