David Bernans.Historical materialism and ordinary language: Grammatical peculiarities of the class struggle “language game”. RM 11(2):18-37 "Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe's (1985) presentation of a post-Marxist framework for understanding symbolic and discursive social processes is critiqued. Although Laclau and Mouffe associate their ""discursive totality"" framework with Ludwig Wittgenstein's (1968) concept of the ""language game,"" it is contended that a fundamental difference exists between the two concepts. Whereas Laclau and Mouffe's notion accounts for connections between signs, Wittgenstein's concept illustrates how individuals use language in performing actions. Consequently, Wittgenstein's thought has important implications for establishing a practical approach toward understanding the ""symbolic."" However, such a project has already been initiated in the writings of early-20th-century Marxist philosopher V. N. Volosinov. Volosinov's (1973) treatment of language as a subversive social mechanism and similarities in Wittgenstein's and Volosinov's respective accounts of language are discussed. 20 References. J. W. Parker"