The only "truth inherent to language" is that it is language, and so is the word "truth". Modern philosophers who were ignorant of physics, and postmodern (or neopostmodern) philosophers who wish to ignore physics, try valiantly to formalize some metaphysical mechanism or method which would allow language to ascertain truth rather than simply enmatter truth, and continue to fail in that regard.

Paradox remains suspect by those philosophers because they desire truth (and metaphysics) to be bound by logic, which provides a precision and consistency of computational validity, and this seems, to them, the only reasonable meaning for truth. But being need not be described to be, and remains ineffable for that reason. The truth is that paradox (logically irresolvable conundrums) are far more meaningful than any tautology (which can be defined as anything which is not a teleology or a paradox), and understanding them, not resolving them, is the proper approach to reasoning. There is an unavoidable paradox intrinsic to the ineffability of being, which is indistinguishable from any other properly formed paradox in reasoning, and identical to metaphysical uncertainty: the unknown is just as unknown as the unknowable.