Let us ˇfirst of all discuss one this point of this the argument first of all: namely that the word has no meaning when nothing corresponds to it. – It is important to

note
state

that the word “meaning” is used ungrammatically if one when use[s|d] it to indicate the thing which [“|‘]corresponds[”|’] to the wordˇ ‘stands for’. This

is
amounts to

confusing the meaning of the name with the bearer of the name. If Paul

is dead,
dies,

then we say the bearer of the name is dead, but

we don't say
no one says

the meaning of the name is dead. And it would be nonsensicaleical to speak that way say such a thing ˇthis, for if the name ˇhad ceased to have meaning, then it wou[,|l]d have no meaning to say, “Paul

is dead
has died

”.

(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.