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 sole remaining task for philosophy is the analysis of language.

Purely philosophical assertions which do not pertain to theology should not be solemnly condemned or forbidden by anyone, because in connection with such [assertions] anyone at all ought to be free to say freely what pleases him.

The chief virtue that language can have is
clearness, and nothing detracts from it so
much as the use of unfamiliar words.

To conclude: there are two well-known minor ways in which language has mattered to philosophy. On the one hand there is a belief that if only we produce good definitions, often marking out different senses of words that are confused in common speech, we will avoid the conceptual traps that ensnared our forefathers. On the other hand is a belief that if only we attend sufficiently closely to our mother tongue and make explicit the distinctions there implicit, we shall avoid the conceptual traps. One or the other of these curiously contrary beliefs may nowadays be most often thought of as an answer to the question Why does language matter to philosophy? Neither seems to me enough.

To summarize, I doubt that linguistics can provide “a new technique” for analytic philosophy that will be of much significance, at least in its present state of development. Nevertheless, it seems to me that the study of language can clarify and in part substantiate certain conclusions about human knowledge that relate directly to classical issues in the philosophy of mind. It is in this domain, I suspect, that one can look forward to a really fruitful collaboration between linguistics and philosophy in coming years.

Language alone protects us from the scariness of things with no names. Language alone is meditation.

Use language what you will, you can never say anything but what you are.

Philosophy is not in the business of explaining anything. Actual occasions explain what happened, not philosophy. If there is one thing which philosophy should not do, it is to try to explain anything.

Neither can embellishments of language be found without arrangement and expression of thoughts, nor can thoughts be made to shine without the light of language.

Language is very powerful. Language does not just describe reality. Language creates the reality it describes.

Philosophy ought really to be written only as a form of poetry.

Applied psychology can, therefore, speak the language of an exact science ill its own field, independent of economic opinions and debatable partisan interests.

But ordinary language is all right.