“It surely isn't a game if there is a vagueness in the rules.” – But itns isn't it then a game? – “

Well
Yes

, perhaps you [wi|']ll call it a game, but anyway it isn't a perfect game.” That is ˇ's to say, it' has then s is then impure has then lost its purity adulterated ˇimpurities, and I am interested in

the pure article
that whichch has lost its purity

. But I want ˇBut what I wish to say ˇis: you're misunderstanding the rôle which the ideal plays in your

language
mode of expression

. That is ˇThat is, to say [Y|y]ou ˇtoo would call it a game; too, that is to say, only you're

dazzled
blinded

by the ideal and so ˇtherefore you don't see clearly the real application of the word “game”. (It would be similar if you were to say // [i|I]t is as though you

said
were to say //

, “The area

perimeter
ˇcircumference

of this wheel is really dπ”; – it's has been made so that exactly”.)

(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.