Presentation about Wittgenstein's language-game and identifying similarities and issues in relation to Ontologies.

1. Aravind Sesagiri Raamkumar

2.  Who is Ludwig Wittgenstein?
 Why is Wittgenstein’s work part of this presentation
 Overview of Wittgenstein’s major works
 Language-game concept and its uses
 Introduction to Linked Data and Ontology
 Relationship between Language-games and Ontology
 Discussion

3.  Austrian-English 20th century philosopher
(1889 – 1951)
 Regarded as one of the most influential
philosophers of the 2oth century
Fought in
World
 Main Themes: Language and Mathematics War I & II
 Main Works: Tractatus Logico-
Philosophicus, Philosophical Investigations
Worked as
a teacher
for

4.  Coz it was suggested by
 Also because I wanted to explore the philosophical
origins of Linked Data particularly Ontologies
 Possibly in trying to critique it!

5. L
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1922) A
Philosophical Investigations (1953)
Rationalistic Thinking N Pragmatic Thinking
Deconstructing Language
Criticizes his own mentor Bertrand Russell
G Understanding Language
Criticizes St Augustine and Descartes
Main Topics: Language and Picture U Main Topics: Language-game, Private
theory, Ethics
A languages, Family Resemblance, Rules
G
E

6. True False
Language
Sentences Propositions John is a bachelor
Words
John is
Propositions Propositions John is a man
unmarried
Elemental Logical Elemental Logical Logical Logical
Propositions Propositions Proposition Proposition
Mutually
exclusive
Question: What is the source for these propositions?

7. Thought
Drawing
Motion
Logical Picture
Symbolic
vs
or
Physical

8.  Refuting St.Augustine on his assumptions about
Language
1) Language is uniform
2) The meaning of words are taught by means of
ostentation
3) All words have object as their meaning

9. Builders game Children’s primitive Giving orders and
language obeying them
“Language is an activity pursued by us, one with purpose”
Language has different application areas
Different language-games in different areas
Different types of sentences –
Commands, Assertions, Questions and so on…

10. LANGUAGE GAMES

11.  Different classifications of language-game
1) Pure and impure language-games (George Pitcher)
 Pure -> Only words
 Impure -> Non-linguistic activities activities are essential
 Refuted!
2) Primary and Secondary Language games (Hintikkas)
 Primary - Essential and self-sufficient language games
 Seconadary - Parasitic on primary language-games
 Imagine “cause and effect” situations

12.  Language-games and rules
 Rules are not necessary for all language games
 Formal vs Factual aspect of language
 Language-games and forms of life
"The basic form of language-game is the one that we act“
 Forms of life can refer to activity
 A form of life is constitutive of the meaning or life of signs.
 Its non-linguistic form gives linguistics signs a place in the
“marketplace”
 Normative nature of language-games
 Not bothered about the symbols but the grammar of
expression and its intention

13.  To tackle and solve language related philosophical
problems – “Tool for deconstructing language”
 To refute the claim that we learn meanings of words
by their definition but by their usage – “Practice
makes a man perfect”
 To construct “Objects of comparison” to look at
language
 To showcase the essentiality of language in our daily
lives – “a conclusive remark”

14. Forms of
life
Rules
Language- Non-
linguistic
Grammatical
Surveyability
games activities
Linguistic
expressions

16. Linked Data
“Let’s just link the
data inside the
Semantic Web documents”
“We are going to
make the computers
understand real
world objects so that
they really answer
Artificial Intelligence our search queries
“We are going to
make the computer
intelligent enough to
do all our work”
Tacit knowledge
and machines?

17. lives in
born in
Web of
Documents
Web of Data

18. model the communication inside a particular domain
Ontology
model the domain itself
is friends
with
ponders
fears
about
is at
odds
with

19. FOAF
Open Graph Protocol

21. 1) Ontology (or vocabulary) of a particular domain comprises of one or
more language games used in that domain
2) The class hierarchy in ontologies are similar to the language
deconstruction from TLP – slight digression from lang-games
3) The rules in language games are similar to the rules that can be built
on top of ontologies to make inferences
4) Since Language games operate at a abstract level, they can be used to
compare two linguistic activities similarly ontologies help in
comparing domains
5) Language games in some sense, can be seen to represent our
discussions in natural languages through formal
language, Ontologies do the same, since machines can understand
only formal languages

22. Major Issues Minor Issues
 Who decides the rules?  Expert vs Amateur modeling
 Universality aspect  Versioning issue
 Issue with currency  How can computers ‘practice’ which is the
 Truth aspect most important thing in rule following?
 Issue with homonyms in a conversation  German to English translation issue with
Wittgenstein’s writing – Possible!
 Rules or certain parts of them can be only
partially explicated -Case for intransitive  (Ondrej) mentions the problems associated
understanding with constructing language-games in
literature meaning ontologies constructed
 Verbal explication of rules may lead to over literature may not be the best option
incorrect interpretation (Johannessen)
 Another Wittgenstein needed to philosophize
 Tacit knowledge articulation? about human-computer communication?
 Issue with completeness and autonomy

23.  Language is very important in life as its mastery is related
to :-
 Understanding our own emotions (recognition),
 Playing a part in a team, convey things meaningfully and
 Finally in deciding the rules of the game!
 Deciding the boundary of language-game might be
difficult with the interwoven nature of current realities
 How granular and how expansive can a language-game be?
 Echoing other scholar’s opinion that language games are
one of the best tools in solving philosophical problems
related to language
 Why isn’t “Communication” thought of being an essential
characteristic of language?

24. End of the presentation language-game!
Lets head over to the post-presentation Q&A language-game 

26.  Preparatory studies for future regularization of language*
 Purporting a new theory for language
 Constructing language models with essential (common)
characteristics
 Implying games that are just for lollygagging

27. Aaberge, T. (2007). The Semantic Web in a philosophical perspective. From The ALWS Archives: A
Selection Of Papers From The International Wittgenstein Symposia In Kirchberg Am
Wechsel, 0. Retrieved from http://wab.uib.no/ojs/agora-alws/article/view/953/602
Aaberge, T., & Akerkar, R. (2012). Ontology and Ontology Construction: Background and
Practices. IJCSA, 9(2), 32–41.
Beran, O. (2007). Language games of literature. From The ALWS Archives: A Selection Of Papers
From The International Wittgenstein Symposia In Kirchberg Am Wechsel, 0. Retrieved from
http://wab.uib.no/ojs/agora-alws/article/view/961
Bienert, R. F. (1996). Wittgenstein's concept of a language-game. University of Toronto (Canada)).
ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, , 327 p. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/304328297?accountid=12665. (304328297)
Frohmann, B. (2004). Deflating Information: From Science Studies To Documentation. University
of Toronto Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=rQhgnaGsohsC
Garrett, B. (2001). Wittgenstein's Private Language Arguments. From The ALWS Archives: A
Selection Of Papers From The International Wittgenstein Symposia In Kirchberg Am
Wechsel, 0. Retrieved from http://wab.uib.no/ojs/agora-alws/article/view/815/328
Johannessen, Kjell S. (1992): "Language, Computer Sciences and Tacit Knowledge". In:
Wittgenstein and Contemporary Theories of Language. Edited by Paul Henry and Arild Utaker.
Working Papers from the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen 5. pp. 28-44.
Tejedor, C. (2011). Starting with Wittgenstein. Bloomsbury. Retrieved from
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=ZrHoHgAACAAJ
Zöllner-Weber, A. (2007). Utilizing OWL for Wittgenstein’s Tractatus. From The ALWS Archives:
A Selection Of Papers From The International Wittgenstein Symposia In Kirchberg Am
Wechsel, 0. Retrieved from http://wab.uib.no/ojs/agora-alws/article/view/959