It delineates the issues like indexicality, reference determination, contextuality, theory of interpretation, theory of belief system, etc. In this context, a question may arise, i.e. can we consider all these issues as the components of 'linguistic philosophy' as well?

Attempting to answer this query John Searle in his work Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (1969) mentions the possible differences between 'philosophy of language' and 'linguistic philosophy'.

According to him, "Linguistic philosophy is primarily the name of a method whereas philosophy of language is the name of a subject" (Searle, 1969, 4). As a method, linguistic philosophy deals with solving and de-solving the philosophical problems by paying attention to the ways in which certain philosophical concepts are used in the language usage. It assists to answer some of the philosophical questions raised in the domain of 'philosophy of language'. Further, he suggests that one can very well apply this method while working on the problems of 'philosophy of language'. Linguistic philosophy describes the structures (phonology, syntax, and semantics) of languages. The data used in philosophy of language are taken from linguistic philosophy.

Adding to this analysis Searle further conveys, "linguistic philosophy attempts to solve particular philosophical problems by attending to the ordinary use of particular words or other elements in a particular language. But 'philosophy of language' strives to give philosophically illuminating descriptions of certain general features of language, such as, reference, meaning, truth, and necessity" (Searle, 1969, 4). In short, philosophy of language deals with language, not languages.

But from the early twentieth century there is an overlapping phenomenon noticed between 'linguistic philosophy' and 'philosophy of language'. Broadly speaking, there is no empirical boundary demarcating these two areas of study. In this regard, one may state that 'philosophy of language' expresses about understanding the structural principles of "language functions".

For no matter how many languages we have, they necessarily subsume three essential components: structure, semantics, and organization. Structure implies the syntax, which expresses about the mechanism of production of language. Semantics conveys assigning meaning to the expression and organization (grammar) delineates about a rule-governed structure. These three components do assist to communicate language. Let us take an example to examine these three elements, "The grass is green". This sentence constitutes of four words and each word contributes significantly to convey the meaning of the sentence. The concatenation of words in the sentence is to be understood as the structure of the sentence, otherwise "Is grass this green" would be a meaningful sentence. Thus, a structure of a sentence may be correct or incorrect. But the semantics of a sentence will be judged as either true or false. In this sentence we obtain the specific meaning, that is about shrubs and their colour is green. This information is known as semantics. The 'grammar' of a sentence indicates the time of past, present, and future of the fact that the sentence is stating about, and along with it, it elucidates the nature of the sentence. In this sentence, the grammar enunciates that if X is grass then its colour is green irrespective of past, present, and future time.

Now let us discuss the types of language proclaimed by scholars of different traditions in the arena of philosophy of language. Unanimously it is agreed that there are three types of language. These are; natural (ordinary) language, meta-language, and logically perfect language.