  The reason why ~x is meaningless, is simply that we have given no meaning to the symbol ~ξ. I.e. whereas φx & ~p look as if they were of the same type, they are not so because in order to give a meaning to ~x you would have to have some property φξ ~ξ. What symbolises in φξ is that φ stands to left of a proper name: & obviously this is not so in ~p. All What is common to all props. in which the name of a property (to speak loosely) occurs is that this name stands to the left of a name-form.
  The reason why e.g. it seems as if ~x or ‘Plato Socrates’ might have a meaning, while ‘Abracadabra Socrates’ would never be suspected to have one, is because we know that Plato has one, & do not observe that in order that the whole phrase should have one, what is necessary is not that Plato should have one, but that the fact that Plato is to left of a name should.
  The reason why ‘thThe property of not being green is not green’ is nonsense, is because we have given no meaning to only given meaning to the fact that green stands to the right of a name; & ‘the property of not being green’ is obviously not that.
  φ cannot possibly stand to the left ˇof (or in any other relation ˇto)

≡ the su symbol of a property. For the symbol of a property e.g. ψx is that ψ stands to left of a name form, & another symbol φ cannot possibly stand to the left of such a fact: if it could, we should have an illogical language, wh. is imposs..

p is false = ~(p is true) Def.

(2015–) Wittgenstein Source Bergen Nachlass Edition (WS-BNE). Edited by the Wittgenstein Archives at the University of Bergen under the direction of Alois Pichler. In: Wittgenstein Source, curated by Alois Pichler (2009–) and Joseph Wang-Kathrein (2020–). (N) Bergen: WAB.