Denying the immanence of meaning and emphasizing the inexhaustible multiplicity of interpretations that each text can accommodate, some distinguished supporters of non-representationalist approaches to language have recently been manifesting concern as to the limits of interpretation. The debate motivated by this concern raises such questions as: In what sense can one say today that certain interpretations are not admissible? Do non-representationalist approaches necessarily lead interpretation to an infinite regress? Do they give license to any interpretation? Is interpretation the replacement of one linguistic sign with another? Is it always necessary? Does it have an end? The major aim of this dissertation is to show how L. Wittgenstein's view of language can throw a light on the issue of the limits of interpretation. Aspects of Wittgenstein's view of language that are relevant to the topic are identified; some of his explicit reflections on interpretation are analyzed; and a comparison is established between his view and a contemporary approach that is often criticized for encouraging excessive flexibility in interpretation, namely deconstruction.