Symbols are a vitally important category for the talking cure, and yet not much theorised. In fact symbols are very badly theorised in psychoanalysis. This is one reason why when one comes across Hanna Segal's (1957) ‘Notes on symbol-formation’ for the first time, most readers regard it as an island of clarity. In this paper I want to offer reflections on what that paper achieved, a review of the very few critiques, and then some further questions it raises that have not been so obvious. It is suggested that Segal chose a philosophical source to support her views which may not have been as clarifying as she required. Certain points of refinement are also suggested that may resolve some of the criticisms. This paper is therefore a contribution to the history of psychoanalytic ideas, with the intention of helping to contribute to their further development.