Quotes About Language

An entire mythology is stored within our language.

a nothing will serve just as well as a something about which nothing could be said.

It is not humanly possible to gather immediately from it what the logic of language is. Language disguises thought.

There are no subjects in the world. A subject is a limitation of the world.

If we spoke a different language, we would perceive a somewhat different world.

Ludwig Wittgenstein

Telling someone something he does not understand is pointless, even if you add that he will not be able to understand it.

Roughly speaking: to say of two things that they are identical is nonsense, and to say of one thing that it is identical with itself is to say nothing.

What is the proof that I know something? Most certainly not my saying I know it.

Die Grenzen meiner Sprache bedeuten die Grenzen meiner Welt.

Think, for example, of the words which you perhaps utter in this space of time. They are no longer part of this language. And in different surroundings the institution of money doesn't exist either.

If someone does not believe in fairies, he does not need to teach his children 'There are no fairies'; he can omit to teach them the word 'fairy'.

Roughly speaking: objects are colourless

If, for example, you were to think more deeply about death, then it would be truly strange if, in doing so, you did not encounter new images, new linguistic fields.

The agreement or disagreement or its sense with reality constitutes its truth or falsity.

That of which we cannot speak, we must pass over in silence

The sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of language.

The limits of your language are the limits of your world.

Philosophy may in no way interfere with the actual use of language; it can in the end only describe it. For it cannot give any foundation either. It leaves everything as it is.

The philosophical I is not the man, not the human body or the human soul of which psychology treats, but the metaphysical subject, the limit - not a part of the world.

All numbers in logic must be capable of justification.   Or rather it must become plain that there are no numbers in logic.   There are no pre-eminent numbers.

For remember that in general we don't use language according to strict rules-- it hasn't been taught to us by means of strict rules, either. We, in our discussions on the other hand, constantly compare language with a calculus preceding to exact rules.

In this sort of predicament, always ask yourself: How did we learn the meaning of this word (good, for instance)? From what sort of examples? In what language-games? Then it will be easier for you to see that the word must have a family of meanings.

It is difficult to describe paths of thought where there are already many paths laid down, and not fall into one of the grooves