ABSTRACT
Moore’s appeal to ordinary language is subservient to his various methods of analysis or of providing the technical meaning of words, phrases, and sentences. It is these ways of performing analyses which emerge as Moore’s most important methodological procedures. Because they are dealing with a notion whose complexity is disguised, it is easy to see how the proponents and opponents of ordinary language in philosophy might make the verbal and substantive error of using the generic heading of ordinary language when the intended reference is really to ordinary linguistic usage or to the ordinary use of language. The numerous distinctions surrounding the notion of ordinary language and the danger of confusing them make it difficult to know precisely what a so called ordinary language philosopher is advocating. The difficulty of pinpointing exactly what Moore is appealing to is compounded by the presence in his writings of a plethora of ways of talking about ordinary language.
