评唐奈兰对罗素和斯特劳森摹状词理论的批评

A Review on Donnellan's Criticism of Russell and Strawson's Theories of Descriptions

唐奈兰指出,相对于不同的语境,同一个限定摹状词的功能可以区分为指称性用法和归属性用法,罗素和斯特劳森的摹状词理论没有充分考虑语境因素,因而忽略了对摹状词用法的区分。我们基本同意唐奈兰对罗素理论的批评,但认为唐奈兰对斯特劳森理论的批评是不适当的,有严重的曲解。斯特劳森先于唐奈兰提出指称性用法和归属性用法的区分,并据此指出罗素理论脱离语境的缺陷。唐奈兰的理论并未超出斯特劳森的理论框架,其主要贡献在于对摹状词的指称性用法及其语境作了更为细致的研究,使之与归属性用法的区别更为明显。

Mr.Donnellan argued that,relatively to different contexts,the functions of a definite description can be divided into referential use and attributive use,but Russell's and Strawson's theories of description did not consider the factor of context enough and ignored the distinction between the uses of description.We basically agree to Donnellan's criticism of Russell,but not to his criticism of Strawson,because there were many misunderstanding points in it.Furthermore,we will show in the paper that Strawson had pointed out the distinction between the referential use and attributive use before Donnellan,and thereby indicated the defects of context-free in Russell's theory.Donnellan's theory does not exceed the framework of Strawson's theory,and its main contribution is the more intensive studies in the referential use and its context.