与戴维森一起读《论语》——早期汉语的语气、语力与交流实践

Reading the Analects with Davidson:Mood,Force,and Communicative Practice in Early China

我们可以看到,早期汉语的交流实践之本性是无法基于对汉语语法和语义特征的考察而加以断定的,对交流实践之语用特征的考察是必要的。本文引入语气和语力这两个概念,回应"语法学进路"及其经验性假设和语气语力关联假设,讨论古代汉语表达语气的语言手段(例如句末助词),戴维森对达米特语气语力关联论的反驳以及他的语力约定论。论文进而通过《论语》中的一章,阐释戴维森反驳达米特约定论的核心论证,即不存在关于诚实的约定。按照戴维森的"语言意义自主性"原则,我们对汉语的考察不应囿于约定,而应直面交流实践。

By reading Analects with Davidson,this paper explains why we should not draw conclusions about the nature of communicative practice simply based on observations about the grammatical and semantic features of classical Chinese;the argument should be based directly on observations about the pragmatic features of their communicative practice.This paper introduces the conceptions of mood and force,and responds to the two basic assumption of the"grammatical approach",namely,the empirical assumption and the mood-force correlation assumption.In responding the empirical assumption,it shows that classical Chinese has its own linguistic devices;and then it discusses Davidson’s argument against Dummett’s argument against the moodforce correlation assumption and his conventionalist theory of force.Then it uses a passage from the Analects to illustrate Davidson’s point that there is no convention of sincerity,which is at the heart of his argument against Dummett’s conventionalist theory.This demonstrates the principle of"autonomy of linguistic meaning",and the study of Chinese should not be confined to the conventions,but should focus on the communicative practice.