  As a celebration of the \emph{Tractatus} 100th anniversary it might be worth
revisiting its relation to the later writings. From the former to the latter,
David Pears recalls that ``everyone is aware of the holistic character of
Wittgenstein's later philosophy, but it is not so well known that it was
already beginning to establish itself in the \emph{Tractatus}" (\emph{The False
Prison}, 1987). From the latter to the former, Stephen Hilmy's (\emph{The Later
Wittgenstein}, 1987) extensive study of the \emph{Nachlass} has helped removing
classical misconceptions such as Hintikka's claim that ``Wittgenstein in the
\emph{Philosophical Investigations} almost completely gave up the calculus
analogy." Hilmy points out that even in the \emph{Investigations} one finds the
use of the calculus/game paradigm to the understanding of language, such as
``in operating with the word" (Part I, \S 559) and ``it plays a different part
in the calculus". Hilmy also quotes from a late (1946) unpublished manuscript
(MS 130) ``this sentence has use in the calculus of language"), which seems to
be compatible with ``asking whether and how a proposition can be verified is
only a particular way of asking `How do you mean?'." Central in this back and
forth there is an aspect which seems to deserve attention in the discussion of
a semantics for the language of mathematics which might be based on
(normalisation of) proofs and/or Hintikka/Lorenzen game-dialogue: the
explication of consequences. Such a discussion is substantially supported by
the use of the open and searchable \emph{The Wittgenstein Archives at the
University of Bergen}. These findings are framed within the discussion of the
meaning of logical constants in the context of natural deduction style rules of
inference.
