PROLEGOMENA #0 a Theory of Language By Lovie MyRIMSEEY Translated by Francis J. Whisfld THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN PRESS Maiison, Miosubes, ond London, 2989105° Hs4 1969 beth stb 0 i es Wiad Seas ke, 19 ee a ston © iy te Fat he sly Went int int nt Se ae} | ‘Son naovod: tags PREFACE. ‘The erga version ofthe prevent work appetred in 1945 under the tte Ontringspepevon grandlggele® The pagiatin of that edton te given a the Ife mangn of thie volume, The English tatlatlon was St pablsd in 2955 se Memoir 7 of the Intraoral Journal of Ameria Linus (diana Un tery Prblication in Antrelgy ond Linguisn),The cond, fevled edllon Incorporate several minor coretons and ‘hange that have aggeted themselves nthe couse of ice Sons between the aathor and the translator, For the develop ‘ent of the theory in eeant your the retder nay be Teered parcalarly t the author's study Le sraication dw lengage replated in Me Exot linguistiques (Trovous du Cac ingei Niue de Copentogue, XU, Copenhagen, Nordisk Speog 0g Kolturfokg, 1983), which inde other ates on lngustle theory by te sae author snd complete bibliog LW. FW. Reine hee Va een of Uni fe ees in dey MoeCONTENTS s & ° ‘Tho study of language athe theory of language Lingus theory and human Lingua theory and empiiien Lingua theory and induction Lingus theory and realty ‘The sm of ing theory Perspectives of guitar. ‘Thesyatem of definite, rindi ofthe analyse Form af the analyse Panetions Sign and Sigare Expresion and conten Invuisats and vrints guise sebema and linguist use ‘Vaiats i the linge schema Fneton sd sum Catalysis) tities of the anasis Langage and aomlangsage CComnotative semiotic and mtasemiotie inal perspective Denis 8 5 Bs S 1 19Prlegomens to 6 | Theory of LanguageSL The study of language andthe tery of loneoge pgysge—human specch—is an inehaustble abundance of lalald teaura. Language i inseparable fom ar ad fal Tow minal hi work Language i th intrest with which ‘man frm thought and feng, mood, aspiration, wil and act, the instrument by whode means he ienon ab ls nuanced, the ulate and deepest foundation gf ham soit, Bt i eats the ultimate, adapenabe ssid ofthe human ie dual, Ms et i hours oflenclines, when the mad wretes rth extonce aa the cont is resolved i the monaogae of he pat ai the thoes lore the fat saening of nt soa sciousness language was echoing about us, rudy to lot around ‘ur fist tender ed of thought and ta accompany or inseparably ‘rough fe, from the simple activites of every living to our ost subline sad intimate moments—these moments ton Which we borow warmth and steagth for or daly fe through hat hl of mer ht nna il ese at agenge gh neath of memoreinberel byte nda and the sal of Ne contnc ht led and wen And eco ditnctive mack ofthe personality, for good 3M tbe data tive mank of hone and of nation snanknd’s patent of by So inextricably has langeage grown ise personality, home, tation, mankind, and lle liself that we may someties be tempted toask wheter language a mere rein of or simply i mot all hase things—the very seed lea of tel growth For thse reasons language has arated an as objet for ‘wondensont and for description, in poetry a5dinacince. Sseace as been Ted to sein language sein of sounds and expensive} 6) estar amenable to exact physic! and phic! ‘ction, and ode ae sgn forthe phenomena of consinsnes. It hat sought in nape, egg, pel cal and loge interpretation, the eta of he Baan Pryche so he constancy of human thought—he former in the Csi lend change of angung, the ator tg of wih two kinds wee cog the mod and te satene, the lable symbse of concept and judgment repectvey Lan: vig, conceived sng sign system and tna eable ety, wan ‘rected to provide ha Key to he tam of hums thought ta thenaturof the hasan pays. Caneel ae superidial ‘och osttaton, ie was to emibate to &chuaceration of {he nation. Conde a. Bctiating and changing Bhenome ‘ont wae to open the door to an andetaing ato the diag tat ‘ple ofthe penalty and ofthe ditt Wanttadas of Sone generations, Language cae tobe looked pons key pasion ‘tom which vistas might be opened in many directions. (Considered ths, language, even when the objet af ae Lie investigation, becomes not aa end in sel, but © mean seins toa koowledge whose mal object ies ouside guage thi although it perhepe fly attainable only throegh lan ‘ge, and which canbe goed aly on other seemptions an "ose pled by language Here language i «means to tran ‘conen knoviege (athe properend yrsopel set he ‘word onscendo!), not the gol ofan immanent ksowledge Thy ‘he physi ond phystologial description of spsehsoundé asf * degenerates into pore physi und pe bysolgy, and fla py Chologiel snd lial dreripton of gas (words and sehences), Into pace paycholog, loi, and ontalogy, so that the ngs pot of deartare i los from view. Thief eonrmed by they Cxptience of tory. Bat even hace this ot deely the ‘se atl he physi, physiol, puychoogcal, andogc Dhenomens por sear not language ite, but aly disconect, eral facet of i alected au objets of stay, not for In tung’ sake, but or these ofthe phenomena toward whichly serupy Avo muzony oF tasovAor s language is oxentd. The same holds tue when language ie fucther considered on the basi ofthese veiptions, x 8 bey to the waderstanding of rca ondtins and othe reconstrac tion of prekistercrelstons among peoples and ations "This i not sai to miimine the vale ofall ese poles of iow aod all thee efforts, but to point ost «danger: the danger that in our selous hate towan he goal of or knowledge we ‘nay ovelol the mens of Kopnledge—languge alt. | 1] “The danger is ren! one bess tb in the natere of | snd it is only by artce thatthe searclpht can be directed om the mans of knowlege ita Thi seve im daly i, whore Isnavare novmlly dacs not come to coscoasoess but iti | equally tre i entiferewerch. Tt was long ago sodertood that in addition to pillogy—the sty of language and its tents as mes to litaary and historical isight—it must be pomible to havea tingunicy, «sty of asgaage ant texts ‘sun en in ts. But it was long way rom plan to exeestion. ‘Once mere language disappointed its scenic suitors. What qe to make op the stain content of conventional nuit Hinge history and the gensiecomparann of langseger ad tithe a am nora reme« Fnoledge ofthe mateo of language, but rather a kuowlege of historical and prebistovical socal conditions end contacts among peoples,» knowledge b= loed throogh language taken a8 t mean. But thi to, _Pilalagy 1 true tht inthe ines tebe ofthis Bnd of Comparative linguistics no oftn sm to bo tying Imgasgo = ‘el bt that fan illon, We are realy readying the deta smeniraf language, which do nt permit sto as the totality at language , Weare studying the physics and physiological, pytolopeal and logical, secilgial and historical precpta- tos of language, not language set = ‘To cabin a tue linguistics, which exmnot be # mere a] clary or derivative sence, something de must e doe. Lia- tustis mast attempt to grasp language, not asa conglomerate ]of nelinguisic (og phys, physnlagel, pechoogcl, Tegel sociological) penomen, bata e seesuticient totality, ‘jected oan lenient without again dappointing te Investigators and escaping thi ew {the ong ram it mst be ponble to measure che sgifance of doing this by the repercins thet such Hgts mst fave on the various transcendent pts of wwf the pl logs and on what has til now ben conser ings. In pti through the theory ofeach «tings i hoeld be posible to provide a wife bse of comparison between la feages by removing at provincial a the formation a coe pts thot is etal ofthe pilaoget and thor eventual to Cstalsh eal and gtlonal geet linguistics. Ta ts more i Imeint consequences, esc of euch anges 5)“ whther the sracture of language be equated wth tht of reaiy or be taken aa reo le distorted reflexion of it—mny alo be measured Ly ite contributions to genre (CHR ctsn ii hry at et der Irae he ame of ch ogy (Stith ml and adn ati Se ea te aenrasioca aiis eee ete te agg {ts purely immanent aim, few. In this connexion, the theory of, ec i tony ane Vie tc bans dine ay ttn ey i et ane oe mena lst eal os fen on hn Tara meatier ete ig et Jenene asec nd on hve bale Tau Situs weneed oumn ete Ace elie Gem upg) Ra by, Sp sein vr slo thatthe pecans of git isonhy ene sch spe ac lm hat hy ayer ‘Say onderaen om any large sce by invertor ith ‘tient reparation nh ing an epee. Most St then cn be oad ete algory a abject spel: tind tlre noeol hm as wen ach Pore erin tory, a tiny oper to of hon. Fortney engi thy cnt be wits td ia evlton cate efalbwed i too dace Sei hs sua, ane to frm gui iy Sve Bonded by any a np Plowing an te, sarc by apa, Ph conention trem ever htldy dace uth and upbtate pe hing hat reveled I thi ld och a xe female dealt dtingsih rom the ote, betwee he teat thea, A pute conto he rset eck Shou be fo ma ar that tae christine nt intereecay n any tempt at lingit theory Wes”) ‘eat acre hl by forging he ptt dee, nl by ataring om he aig al css hae the ak 1 sed nthng of postive nen To a age een ne ‘al bad onthe sae cpl sal ne Bat vee fie in prvi rath, att wih i reread {om coats ths of igi thy, We sal $1 ex acovldg oo nbn where we Bae] {hereto ve ee each by tesla Ong | Sng tea shuld be sgl ut oan obvi | pioneer: the Swiss, Ferdinand de Saussure? t Prpratory wok of etal Iprce tothe ng theory hare rented we done i elaboration with etaln tnember of te Ling Geof Copenageny nota with “Die Alona der Sadat” (ound XVI, 38, moar "eid Sec ti pl ah oC MyH, J. Ulli the years 1994-195 In the elaboration of some ‘ofthe base sumptions ofthe theory the ator proto from ‘icusions inthe Capeiingen Pilosphical ard Peychological Srcty and besides, fom a more detied exchange of thoaght vith Jogen Jorgensen and Rdgse Tranekjar Reston. The responeblty for the present work ithe ethors aloe. 2 Lingua thery ud aio Ainge Geory which seazces forthe specie wtrctare of Innguage through an excunivly formal system of prenicest ‘mus, while continually taking acount of the Butustons snd ‘changes of speech, necessarily refuse to rant exclave sigs ‘ence to thove changes; ant eek s eomlony, which iv not ‘chord in some “realty” ontsie languages constancy that rakes language lineage, whitever ange tay be, and that thes pastel lngoageidetia with tl inal tx ‘aoas manitstations. Wher this constancy bas been found td desried tay then be projected onthe “really” outside + Tanguage, of whatever sort that “eat” may be (phyla, + plysaogl,peycoloial, logis, ontological), 10 that, even Inthe conideraton of that “rely,” language asthe ental“ int of reference retin the chil objet—and not a a eam lomerte at sam organiad totality with ingle strwtare A the dotieating prince oi “The src for such an aggsogatng and ntgzating constancy, fs aur to be opporod by #sutain humana talon which {in varios dea til now profominated is Hague ence nie typical form this oman tradition danleso plat the! ‘xntance of he constancy andthe leitimaey of seeking Ae jening to this view, humanistic, as oppored to mats, phy strat phenomena, be subject to eact and gedfaling, W°" erntmet. Inthe Bld ofthe humanitie,cansedieny, © to] there would heve to bea dierent method namely, mer," Alesrption, whch woald be nearer to poetry han ty , i Jnomena are non-recurrent and for that very reason a Tike! awouistic suzony 4p ROWANISLE ° exact aclence—o, at any event, a method that rte taf § lcarsive form of presentation, in which the phenomena pass by, one by one, without being interpreted through = system. Tn the Bl of Rtory this tess bus boen eld ax doccine, andi min act to be the very bass of history in is cles! frm. ‘Accordingly, thowe dlcpnes that may perhaps be called most Dumanistiohe study of Hiteratare and the study of att—huve also been historically dascptve rather than sysematisig ds Ciplins In carta eld tendency to systematice may be ob served, bt bltory and, slong wth, the humanities ae a whole sem tobe fa from wing to eecogoie the leptimacy and poalty of any such eystemetzatio. “A prior would sem to be + generally Vall thas that for covery process there Is comespanding sion, by which the proces can be analyzed and decibed by means of United ‘numberof premises Te aust be asumed hat any proces can toe anslyoed fate lnted umber of cements sseurtng Vaslous combinations. Then, on the basis of ths anlyi, it ‘ould be pole to order eae elements int clases acording to thle poles of combination And it should be further ose to act up.a general nd exhaustive calculus ofthe pose ‘le combinations. Altory ap tablished shoud se above the level af eve primitive dseipton to that of a eytemati, nat, nd generalising scence, in he Chet of wich all vent (pot ‘le combinations of elements) are fresean andthe conlions for thee rellaation ctaned 1 seams Incontetable that, 20 long as the buries have not teste this the as « worlng hypothe, they have neg lected thle most important ta, hat of sekng to etal the Iumaakste studies a scene It shouldbe undertod thatthe “desciptas of humanist phesomena must choose between, 08 the one hand, pout treatment alone as the only pose eat- ‘mont and onthe oto bd, poetic and scot treatment as two coordinate orm of desertion; and should alo be under ‘ood thatthe eice Mages om tating the tess hat a processi ‘na an undetyng sytem, 13] Te would seem a prio’ that language isan objact os. hich this these might be tested with an expetation of ‘postive rere. A mere dicurive description of linge ‘vents cannot possibly arouse suficiantinteret, andthe ned for ‘supplementary, spstmatizing point of vew has theeore a- ‘rey oun fl: behind the fetal proves ave been soap & Phonetic system, «semantic system, a grammatical system. But Until now, linguists slnce elated by piolgit with transcendent objective snd under he tongntece obama Jam that has rected he ide of system has filed to carry the analysis through to the end, to make its premsss dear, oto Steve fora uniform peace of analysis, and it hus therefore remained vague an sbjetive netaphysicl and ethatiiing, 1 say nothing ofthese many occasions when thas entrenched [taf ina completdy anecdotal frm of presentation. ~ It's the sim of linge thr tots om what seems par tally inviting objet, the tess that a process hasan under Iying systema Suctustion an undelying constancy. Voie? led beoreband eal suck an attempt ithe fald of the humanities, peeing that we canna abject o seat analy” ‘man’s spltua ie nd the phenomena implies without ing ‘hatte and consequently allowing our objet to escape consider ‘ion, are monly sprorate and cannot resin seeds fo the attempt. Ifthe attempt fl—not in patcaarperfony noe, but in priniple—then thee objections are vali, a omni phan a be ated ol bjt a ssthtially. Tf, however, the attempt sacceeds—so Uhat Cp Palcipe shows tel pracicable~then these voice wl Mecomnp Sent of thle own aoe, and it would then remain te pa Cenrsponding experiments in the ctrl of the hypaiten 1 Lingus tery and empiriion RO 4 ‘theory wil attain is snp fom by Dulding o8 ho oth pram han thse neces seule By oj Monty i ves inode conform tots purpose theory must be capac] He ot yeting, in lt wpetons, reall hat apes with Gale (etal or presume) empreal dats | Ah i yah maga uot, host lor wl he be evenigntd by epi temdlogy. Sack an investigation may, we thnk, be omitted bere, We ble that the reqiroment we have vaguely frre ta] ated above the requirement of so-called emp, wll esatsed by the principle that follows. By this pence, which west above all ethers our theory i at once cle ie Tngoishable fom all provogs underskings of linguistic loopy The desertion shal be feof onrasiton uf.comssten, susie, and ot simple as pow, Th requirement of freien {rom conraiction takes precedence oer the rouireens of o Iwate deseiplon. The reir! of eakouatve decision lates pacdonce oer th reuirent of smi ‘We venture to cll this principle the ampiial print. But ‘we ae wing to abandon the name epistemological nvestgn- tion tows ito be inappropite Bem eu point of view thie rerey # quetion of terminology, whch does not afect the 4 pty on induction ‘Thelatlton of ot aocalledempcal pint sot the same san suction of nductiviem, understood asthe requirement ‘gradual sceit gom something poticolar to something [exer or-ftom somethig more lintel to romething les Tiled. Here again we are in the realm of tame that require isenological analy ad tefiement, tis se terme wich ‘We ous shal later have cesian to apply moe preity than ‘ve ca here. And here agin, both now and later, = teri Tngealreaning remains to be msde with estemlony. For the time beng we are interest in larifying oo postion a opposed ‘je\ fom — sti = tm shone inte Our oly ple proere ire wi to orders system to the procs of tat txt, wil be ansanalyi, ony snxoviente nok Ap nRAZTY 8 in which the teat regarded asa cls anelyzed ita components then tht components a clases anlyzd nto components, and son unt the analyse exhauated. Thi procolore may there- {ore be deed biel ws progrnion from clam to component, ‘ot frm component t das, a8 analytic and speiying, not ‘seyntheicand generalising, novernent athe post of inde tion Inthe tense established in ings In recent Hingis, ‘where the contr: ha boon actuated thie method of procedure for a3 approximation thereto as been designated by the word ee baleve we sal ater beable o demonstrate tat ‘he termincogeal opposition on tis point not onopeabe 5 Lipski theory ond reality With the teminclogy that we have chose, we have been abe to duignae the method of linguist thoory se nace em ‘seal and necesaiy deductive, qn we have thos bee able to {Sst light from ene direction onthe primitive and immediate ‘question of the elation of lngiae theory tothe raed em ‘cal data, ut ofl have to est Highton the sae 4] queton lm another dreton. ‘That eto wy, we st, Investigate to see whether the possible nfiences between ‘he theory ands abject (or objects) ae geiprocl or undiee tonal To fomuate the problem i a simple, tenden and dalbertely nave form-—doer the objet detrmine end alfect the theary, or does the theory determine and ast objec? ore oo, we must et aid the purely epatemologial prob Jom nts ene scope and rset oor attention tat axpet of Jn which sey concer aT clear hat the frequently mi sed and disparaged word tery can be taken in diferent senses. Theory can meas, among oer things, a ayem of hypothoes the word Is taken ts thir—now froquent-—snt, I ie ear that the tnencebetwean they and objet unidirectoal the object determines and acts the tary, not sie ssa tte |Hypotheses can be shown to be true or fase by a process of verliation, But it may have aveady been apparent hat we ‘te wing the word hry In nother ses, In thie connesion, two factor are of egal importance: 1. A thory nour sng, fn taf independent of any ex \petcace. in el it say nothing at all about the posit of Fs application and relation to empiric! dats. It laces no tslntence postulate. Ie cotter what has ees called purely Adve system, inthe ene thse t may be ed aloe ta com pte the pour that fll for Se premises, 2. A henry introduces certain premises oncening which the *heoretictan knows fom preceding experience tht they fell the |S. entitions for application octane] Seta, These rem ines re ofthe geotest pone generality and may’ therelare beable vss the condition for epliation tu large number of expiialdata “ie it of tfc we sh cl he eine a + “shor, the ane we tn salt oppor en ‘coy cometh tha ai nt patina {Sap btflow fam teen nda eee ‘stein seve npn eee ethene ny tata. ; “ty eet wt dle heen, ih ast five sium opens Geng ne) ate 1s) Seda hem er only ta fe condoned, thts phen opt alows ihe epeatin «the tnt wi coe anes este ston faites cy en tc an (ee at ny ser may is ype fang he seated fee tee ey Clary ton heey ol open encly To mein hs bet meh fos ot pos We’ an leave it to eistmology to decide whether the base ‘explelyintoduced by ur ngs theory need aay ferther {clonal fowndation, In any event, they ae traced ack so far ‘and they ae all oso general a mare tht none would soem > Despecicto Inge thary as oppoed to ater theories. Tit {sone because ou am i procely to make car oor preiaes ssfarback as we an without ging beyond what seems drety sppropriate to Tingle theory. We ace thereby forced in me degre to invade the domnin of epistemology, a has appeared In the preceding sections. Our procedure here i bse on the conviction thet i is impoale to elaborate the theory of Darius science wltbout an active callabartion with ep tenology Linguistic theory, then, sverelgly defines is object by an subitraryand appropiate statey of promis. The theory cone Sts of eseulaton frome te fewest and most geers! possible premises, of which nove that is see tothe tary arom 0 be of axiomatic nature. The eseuation permits the predieton of posttest says nothing about dhe reiation. Thus, ‘fing theory, taken in hi seae i ae in elation to the concept of realty, the answer to our questo, whether the by ject determines and allt the theory or wena, "oth tnd by virtue af its aritary nate the thoory is oe; by virtue ofits appropyiatenis tis realiaie (With the word realism taken hee in the oder, and not, a8 befor, fs the) rotinrl see) (6, Phe oi of igus tary A theory, thon nour see ofthe word, any be tld to i at ‘roving procadural method By ment of which objet f Dremlsed nature can be decibel sal-consently and exbause lively. Such a self-consistent and exhaustive description 16) lead to what is usualy called a knowledge ot compe enon ofthe object in question, In sate, then, we may sso sy, wiht rs of bung tisleading or obscure, that\ 6 "EoUEGOMENA To A EORY OF axoUAGR the si of theory i to dete a etd of prove for Inowing or comprebaing ten object Bat tthe ane tine 1 theay not only ment to Provide ov withthe mean af Towing oedfnte ject Isat bess rand an erable ‘sto brow all coedable bet othe sue prem nace the on under conlderten, A theory ma be geoe in the eset it mus provide with al for comptondng net cnlyn ven bjt or the eject Berto ere, bt al coneivabe bjt ow eatin preniedmitare By meat oa Chery me tm ouravesto et nt onl herent pe oxy reseed to but any vertu. ‘The objets of ater to lagu hry ar txt, The tm fling thay io prove procter method by ne which « den tort can be comprcbendedthoegh a ale Consistent end exhaustive devriptian. Bat Engi theory ‘must ls indicate how any other text ofthe same prem tere an beunertond Inte ane way, ant dost by furishing with al that can be wand on any wh ex. ar example ele of Ung tery tht enable * to abe sl-ontety and exbuaively st ont een Danish et, but al ter ven Dah teat, ad ot nly” All given, But alto al conctable or posible Dish et ne lading texte that wl not ent el omorrow o ltr, ong, fstheyarterts ofthe see bind, tesa hese oe ‘ator aston etfs conldred Linguists theory sain, {requirement By Bulag om the Danish tots tha pare} # ‘ied up tomo and snc thn lone ac serous ber \denteti¢ most ecotet ith bul o deta rom! them. Bt by wing the taf nga teary, we a rep from thi ection afters nd of owed ob sl aan om other texts. This howled concern, not mercy oye. * Uily the prs ort fom whieh abated tthe, ‘soon or lounge hl ets te ane ped sa} tre ae cooled ad wih the hap of ch we an contract new tert, With the linguistic infomation ey nw ov swousente sxsony ” we have thus obtained, we sal be ele to construct any con tcivableo theory poostble ets a the same language. ‘Bat lingultle theory mast be of ute for dsebing nnd pre~ icing nt only eny Dowdle text compoaed in a certain Ine nage but, on the base ofthe information that it ges ebout Tangunge in gene ny psa txtcompoed In any Iaguage whatsoever. The ingastiethenttcan mst ofcourse atempt to sty this requltement Likewise by starlag with certain ‘election of texts fn dierent lenguage. Obiouly, It would be hramanly inposibe to work though all exiting texts, and, moreover, the labor would be futile since the cheary amt wlso Cover teri as yet uavelled, Hence the Hague eoretclan, Tie ay other thera, mus take the precaution to freee tt coneivable pout even sich polis as he him tel hes not experienced or sen realidad to adit them into is theory ao that i wll be appiable evento ters and lan reer that have not appeared inhi prac, orto langeages that have peshape never been refined, and ame of which wil probably never be relied. Only thus ean be produce Tings Theory of eneued pleat. "th therfore necessary to ensue the applicability of the ‘Seory, and any epplistion necssriypreppess the theory. But it sof the gratetloprtance not to conse the theory ‘with is spplctone or with the pracial method (procedure) oF epplicalon, The theory wil Jud to a procure, but no (practic “aacoveryprocdare” wil eat forh inthe prevent ok, which doe ot, sry apentiog, even fer th theory in sysecue form, but only it prlegomens. 7 : ‘iy virtue of te apoeopiteness the woek of agustic theory is empickal, and by vite of ts aritarness Iti caleuative, yom certain expetienes, which must acesarly be Tmited™ ¥en hough they shouldbe as vated as pase he linge ‘hooreian ste up a calultion of all the consirable pont Tiles within cetin frames. Thee frames be constructs at relly: he lacovers certain properties een i all showe obJets that pope get cl language, a oner thn to gem eral thoe proper and tah ten by dentin. From that momen henge thea hen aster bat ap ropes decreed to wich cj theory can and aot be apple. He then 8 up, fr al objets ofthe nate ‘reised inthe dfston, «gener cla, wich ll com Cela css eeforacen This eal, wich dedaced fom the etalhed dainton independently all exon, pe. ‘es the ol for desing ocompreendng ge ex ‘the guage on which it scone, Ligue hry 438 canot bevel (oneal or invallsted) by erence / (to such exiting torts and language. 1 an be jged {ent with eterece tothe sel-consitency and exhaustive of Usiatele "trough hs geerl xclton, nguyen by conscutng seve pba ethos a prods all of which an provide a sltconstent and exhasivedxplon of ay fiven ext and hereby of any anguage mataee thet aon thot pone mths of procure ht one sal be cone * tint ress inthe sine pose description. 10 sever! nntbods yi equal simple derntos, that oe To be chun that leds to th ea though te singlet pect “his piney which Is dada from ou nal epic nl, we ca the vy ice ‘ ‘in byelrence tis nl, and oly by eae tot, hat we ca tach ay meaning toa easton that on plc} = consent and erative satin crest a nate ee fect. Tha elton node he core ne with cies [inthe night degree ith thesimpcy picnic fg We may thn jude Tinga har and is spain by testing whether the sition trodes, wie sting ‘qucements ol seléconsseny ed exhale deen, the simple pombe ‘ TE, they is own pina pins” and by ijn, shatter mo beta Conese i to imagine sever agli ther, in he sent of “appa: Inaios to the Heal setup and formated inte ‘empieal nce” One of hee must neem the deve on, toed anyconcretly developed ope theory hope o be pre Gant hat debstv ne ett follows hs gs Uory at odie i ot dfn by a conrte shape and bath ‘owl and dsl foc Rogie hry to pg by o> Wing wow cones developments thal yield ah ever one ap Pepe prlgomen othe cry, in the eli sid of the teary tha we hall be ntereted—in the et way eee ing the regiment of apicbity Tie wl be ade by a “tvetgton ofeach fn hat may be el abe Gon 1s] tute inthe struct of any language, and by an | trstgnion of the logical consequences of xing those festares with the ido desitions 7. Pesce of lings theory ‘Avoiog the iter dominant transcendent pont of view and tecking tn immement understanding of Inguage as 4s fulstet, specie stracture (p. 6, and seeking & consiancy ‘thin language sl ot outside (8) Hague hoary Bee is by creamaeabing th cope of ls abet, This reumscip- {lone neesy, but iis nly a temporary mescue and involves norton ef the he os no cman teeta {toi th oda ttly which tangge Teves oly lve tien gene teh fo he sae iste compen confrty wih Dare sed end tun It Wa ipl emerges af the ned fo ding hin trie a compas a othe inspec fan os) "he dramsspion an be comida jeder permis an erhunive and sont bendsing fe Sretve trough e pfeil ects on he Tenomens mrendng rv hat hey sre acto