In the description of the language game ˇin № ([4|57]) I said that the colours of the squares corresponded words “r”, “g” etc., correspond ed to the colours of the squares. But what's does this correspondence consist in how far ˇin what sense can one say that certain colours of the squares cor[e|r]e[p|s]pond to these signs[,|?] ˇFor [T|t]he explanation in ([4|5]7) only made a connection between these signs and certain words in our ˇordinary language (the names of colours). – Well, it was assumed that the use of the signs was taught

differently
otherwise

in the ˇactual game

–
, namely

by pointing to paradigms. Quite[,| ;] – but what does it mean to say that in the practice of the language certain elements correspond to the signs? – Does it consist in th[e|is], fact that

the person
whoever is

describing the complex of coloured squares always says “r” where there is a red

red square, “b” where there is a black square, etc.? But what if he makes a mistake in his description and wrongly says “r” where [r|t]here is a black square; what's is then the criterion that shows that here for this was a ˇbeing a mistake? – Or does the fact th[t|a]t “r” indicates “[“|‘]r[”|’]'s indicating standingch for ˇstands for” a red square” consist in the fact, ◇◇◇ mean that the people who use the language always have a red square before their minds when they use the sign “r”?
In order [t|T]o see more clear[e|l]y we have should here, as in innumerable ˇa great number of similar cases, to keep look at the details of the processes what really happens in detail before our eyes

; as it were, from close by.
, to observe from close at hand what happens.

If I am inclined to assume ˇtake the view that a mouse comes into existence is produced springs, by spontaneous generation,

from
out of

grey

rags
scraps

and dust, then it will be well to examine these

rags
scraps

carefully to see how a mouse could have concealed itself in them, how it could

have got
come

there etc.. If, however, I am convinced that a mouse cannoch'cht

be generated from
just come into being out of

these things, then this examination may be superfluous.
ˇBut we have yet got to see [W|w]hat it [k|i]s, however, that hinders, in ˇdoing philosophy, such an examination of makes it so difficult to scrutinize these details,. is something we have yet to come to understand. // to see what it is that sets itself against our scrutinizing these details, when we are doing philosophy. //

(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.