What?
Cassirer: “Only when we put away words will be able to reach the initial conditions, only then will we have direct perception. All linguistic denotation is essentially ambiguous–and in this ambiguity, this “paronymia” of words is the source of all myths…this self-deception is rooted in language, which is forever making a game of the human mind, ever ensnaring it in that iridescent play of meanings…even theoretical knowledge becomes phantasmagoria; for even knowledge can never reproduce the true nature of things as they are but must frame their essence in “concepts.” Consequently all schemata which science evolves in order to classify, organize and summarize the phenomena of the real, turns out to be nothing but arbitrary schemes. So knowledge, as well as myth, language, and art, has been reduced to a kind of fiction–a fiction that recommends its usefulness, but must not be measured by any strict standard of truth, if it is not to melt away into nothingness.” Cassirer Language and Myth
I still don't know what this is supposed to mean, and I am not unfamiliar with Aristotle.
Aristotle was also unaware of the incompleteness problem discovered by Gödel, that no reasoning tool of that type can be complete.
There are fundamental contradictions in the nature of language, it however doesn't make them not useful for the entire experience of daily communication, all of literature, and so on.
Just that there are affirmations that are true, but there is no set of rules that can prove them.
I would point you to Gödel, Escher, Bach for a very nuanced discussion about this topic.