Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus

3.22

The name represents the object in the proposition.

3.221

I can only n a m e objects. Signs represent them. I can only speak a b o u t them, I cannot u t t e r them. A proposition can only say h o w a thing is, not w h a t it is.

3.23

The requirement of the possibility of simple signs is the requirement of the determinateness of the sense.

3.24

The proposition which deals with the complex stands in an internal relation to the proposition which deals with its constituent part.
The complex can only be given by its description, and this will be true or false. The proposition in which there is mention of a complex will, if this does not exist, not be nonsensical, but simply false.
That a propositional element denotes a complex can be seen from an indeterminateness in the propositions in which it occurs. We k n o w that everything is not yet determined by this proposition. (The designation of generality c o n t a i n s an archetype.)
The summary of the symbol of a complex into a simple symbol can be expressed by a definition.

3.25

There is one and only one complete analysis of the proposition.

3.251

The proposition expresses what it expresses in a definite, clearly specifiable way: the proposition is articulate.

affairs.
In the proposition the name represents the object.
Objects I can only name. Signs represent them. I can only speak of them. I cannot assert them. A proposition can only say how a thing is, not what it is.

The postulate of the possibility of the simple signs is the postulate of the determinateness of the sense.
A proposition about a complex stands in internal relation to the proposition about its constituent part.
A complex can only be given by its description, and this will either be right or wrong. The proposition in which there is mention of a complex, if this does not exist, becomes not nonsense but simply false.
That a propositional element signifies a complex can be seen from an indeterminateness in the propositions in which it occurs. We know that everything is not yet determined by this proposition. (The notation for generality contains a prototype.)
The combination of the symbols of a complex into a simple symbol can be expressed by a definition.

There is one and only one complete analysis of the proposition.
The proposition expresses what it expresses in a definite and clearly specifiable way: the proposition is articulate.

In a proposition a name is the representative of an object.
Objects can only be named. Signs are their representatives. I can only speak about them: I cannot put them into words. Propositions can only say how things are, not what they are.

The requirement that simple signs be possible is the requirement that sense be determinate.
A proposition about a complex stands in an internal relation to a proposition about a constituent of the complex.
A complex can be given only by its description, which will be right or wrong. A proposition that mentions a complex will not be nonsensical, if the complex does not exist, but simply false.
When a propositional element signifies a complex, this can be seen from an indeterminateness in the propositions in which it occurs. In such cases we know that the proposition leaves something undetermined. (In fact the notation for generality contains a prototype.)
The contraction of a symbol for a complex into a simple symbol can be expressed in a definition.

A proposition has one and only one complete analysis.
What a proposition expresses it expresses in a determinate manner, which can be set out clearly: a proposition is articulate.