비트겐슈타인의 전기 언어관과 후기 언어관을 대변하는 가장 보편적인 개념은 ‘그림이론’과 ‘말놀이’일 것이다. 이와 같이 상이하게 언어관을 명명하는 이유 중 하나는 언어의 의미에 대한 이해의 상이성이다. 즉 전기 비트겐슈타인은 언어의 의미를 단일하고, 획일적이며, 고정적인 것으로 파악하는 반면, 후기 비트겐슈타인은 언어의 쓰임에 따라 획득하게 되는 다양성을 주장하고 있다.
전기 비트겐슈타인의 이러한 언어관을 지시론이라 규정지을 수 있는데, 본고에서는 이 지시론의 문제를 고찰하고자 한다. 논자는 전기 비트겐슈타인의 지시론적 언어관을 그의 그림이론과의 관련성 속에서 그 규정 가능성을 발견하고자 한다. 그러나 이미 여러 학자들에 의해 이러한 논의는 있어 왔고, 이 그림이론이 전기 비트겐슈타인만의 것인지, 또는 후기 비트겐슈타인에게도 지속되어져 왔는지에 대한 논의 또한 그러하다. 논자는 본고에서 이에 대해서는 매우 개괄적으로 제시하였다. 이것은 그림이론에 대한 해커의 주장을 주된 논거로 삼아 그것과 상반되는 힌티카와 케니의 주장을 개괄적으로 제시함으로써 제안되었다.
특히 논자는 그림이론을 전기 비트게슈타인을 지시론자로 규정하기 위한 전제로서 설정하였는데, 이것은 그림이론이 지시론이라는 언어관의 특징을 포함하고 있다고 판단하였기 때문이다. 그러므로 그림이론이 전기 비트겐슈타인의 전유물인지, 또는 후기 비트겐슈타인에게까지 지속되는지에 관한 논의는 매우 중요하다. 논자는 이에 관해 그림이론은 전기 비트겐슈타인에게 속한 것이라고 가정하였는데, 만약 그림이론이 후기 비트겐슈타인에게까지 지속되었다 하더라도 이때 전기와 후기 비트겐슈타인에게 있어서의 ‘그림’ 또는 ‘그림이론’의 개념이 상이하다고 주장하였다.
The most well-known concepts that represent Wittgenstein’s early view and later view of language are ‘picture theory’ and ‘language game’. One of the reasons why different names are used for these different views of language stems from different understanding about the meaning of language. In his early days, Wittgenstein considered the meaning of language singular, standardized, and fixed while in later days he claimed diversity of language that expands in accordance with its use. Wittgenstein’s early view of language can be called ‘referential theory’ and this paper aims to examine the issue of this theory. It intends to find the possibility to define Wittgenstein’s referential theory in relation to his picture theory. However, there have been lots of such efforts among scholars, and discussions have also been profuse as to whether the picture theory is relevant only to his early view of language or to his later view as well. This paper gave a very general description about these issues. It took Hacker’s opinion on picture theory as grounds for the argument and offered a general description about the ideas of Hintikka and Kenny that are opposed to Hacker’s. Especially, this paper postulated picture theory as a premise to define Wittgenstein as a referential theorist under the presumption that picture theory has the characteristics of the view of language, referential theory. Therefore, the discussion whether picture theory relates only to the early view of Wittgenstein or extends to his later view is very important. As for this issue, this paper presumed that picture theory belongs only to the early days of Wittgenstein and even if it lasted till the later days, there was difference in the concepts of ‘picture’ or ‘picture theory’ between his early view and later view.
The most well-known concepts that represent Wittgenstein’s early view and later view of language are ‘picture theory’ and ‘language game’. One of the reasons why different names are used for these different views of language stems from different understanding about the meaning of language. In his early days, Wittgenstein considered the meaning of language singular, standardized, and fixed while in later days he claimed diversity of language that expands in accordance with its use. Wittgenstein’s early view of language can be called ‘referential theory’ and this paper aims to examine the issue of this theory. It intends to find the possibility to define Wittgenstein’s referential theory in relation to his picture theory. However, there have been lots of such efforts among scholars, and discussions have also been profuse as to whether the picture theory is relevant only to his early view of language or to his later view as well. This paper gave a very general description about these issues. It took Hacker’s opinion on picture theory as grounds for the argument and offered a general description about the ideas of Hintikka and Kenny that are opposed to Hacker’s. Especially, this paper postulated picture theory as a premise to define Wittgenstein as a referential theorist under the presumption that picture theory has the characteristics of the view of language, referential theory. Therefore, the discussion whether picture theory relates only to the early view of Wittgenstein or extends to his later view is very important. As for this issue, this paper presumed that picture theory belongs only to the early days of Wittgenstein and even if it lasted till the later days, there was difference in the concepts of ‘picture’ or ‘picture theory’ between his early view and later view.
