A. J. Ayer's Language, Truth, and Logic had been responsible for introducing the Vienna Circle's ideas, developed within a Germanophone framework, to an Anglophone readership. Inevitably, this migration from one context to another resulted in the alteration of some of the concepts being transmitted. Such alterations have served to facilitate a number of false impressions of Logical Empiricism from which recent scholarship still tries to recover. In this paper, I will attempt to point to the ways in which LTL has helped to foster the various mistaken stereotypes about Logical Empiricism which were combined into the received view. I will begin by examining Ayer's all too brief presentation of an Anglocentric lineage for his ideas. This lineage, as we shall see, simply omits the major 19 th century Germanophone influences on the rise of analytic philosophy. The Germanophone ideas he presents are selectively introduced into an Anglophone context, and directed towards various concerns that arose within that context. I will focus on the differences between Carnap's version of the overcoming of metaphysics, and Ayer's reconfiguration into what he calls the elimination of metaphysics. Having discussed the above, I will very briefly outline the consequences that Ayer's radicalisation of the Vienna Circle's doctrines had on the subsequent Anglophone reception of Logical Empiricism.1 This paper was first presented in 2018 at the conference on 'The Historical and Philosophical Significance of Ayer's Language, Truth and Logic' at the University of Pécs, organised by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the "Empiricism and atomism in twentieth-century Anglo-Saxon philosophy" Research Group. I owe many thanks to all those present, as well as to the anonymous reviewers, for many helpful questions and suggestions. I am particularly grateful to Adam Tamas Tuboly for inviting me to contribute to the conference and book, and for his many insightful comments and suggestions.