On the other side the logical positivism has focused his investigations on syntax and semantics. This depuration of the original semiosis of all its objective elements permits the syntactical and semantical reconstruction and the application of the mathematical methods characteristic of the pure syntaxis and semantics. Likewise the mere taking in account in the syntactical and semantical construction of a language of some characteristics of its possible subject -for instance its finiteness by requiring the effective decidability of all its concepts cannot substitute the explicit statement of its belonging to the language. The acknowledgement in the objective language-level of the requirementes which emerge out of the essential properties of the subjects is not identical unavoidable necessity of its presence. Nevertheless the actuality of this presence of the subject as a necessary condition of all languages would be an exceedingly restrictive condition.
Every language supposes the mediate or immediate presence of a subject.
Only in his book The Crisis of the European Sciences and Tanscendental Phenomenology Husserl succeeds to precise the scope and the method of phenomenological logic. According to the previous terminology this is nothing else but a theory of the speech. As it is well known, modern logic is fundamentally a theory of language. Hence, both do not oppose but compliment each other. It is quite clear that if phenomenological logic would be a theory of speech in the way as Moore and the English analytical school has developped it studying the usual language it would collide with the syntactical and semantical analysis of logical positivism and would collapse against the superiority and accuracy of the mathematical methods which it employs.