期刊文献+

“范畴”与“概念”之辩:基本层次 被引量:1

Exploring the Distinction Between Category and Concept:The Basic Level
下载PDF
导出
摘要 "范畴"和"概念"的差别在基本层次表现的最为明显。基本层次范畴是物质性的、直接有意义;基本层次概念则是意识性的、间接才有意义。基本层次范畴是个意义完形;基本层次概念则为其中的一部分。基本层次范畴可分为物质范畴和符号范畴,两者皆为主体客体化和客体主体化的双向过程的产物,差别在于对象不同:前者为实体;后者为符号。与此类似,基本层次概念也可分为物质概念和符号概念,两者皆为个体经验上升为集体经验和集体经验走向个体经验的双向过程的产物,差别在于内容多寡:前者被包含在后者之内;后者为前者及符号的系统、语用意义之和。实指定义被证明是基本层次"范畴"和"概念"诸方面的连接纽带,对语言认知起着基础性作用。 The gap between categories and concepts presents itself at its widest at the basic level. The basic categories, as physi- cal phenomena, are directly meaningful; the basic concepts, being mental objects, only mean indirectly. A basic category is a meaning gestalt, of which only part finds its way into the related concept. Basic categories are of two kinds : those of materials and those of symbols. The former involves physical entities ; the latter concerns linguistic symbols. Both of them arise, though, out of a two-way process, namely, subjectification and objectification. A similar division, based on the interaction between individual and collective experience, can be made between material and symbolic concepts, the former being included in the latter, which also takes in the systematic and pragmatic aspects of the signs. The ostensive definition has been shown to have a key role to play in linguistic cognition as it serves as a fundamental link among the various components of the basic level.
作者 石玮
出处 《西安外国语大学学报》 2012年第2期15-18,共4页 Journal of Xi’an International Studies University
基金 2009年江西省高校人文社会科学研究项目"范畴化句式‘A是B’的语义 语用及认知研究"(项目编号:YY0917)的子课题之一
关键词 基本层次 “范畴” “概念” 差别 实指定义 basic level category concept distinction ostensive definition
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1Berlin, B. , Breedlove D. & Raven P. Principles of Tzeltal Plant Classification[M]. New York: Academic Press, 1974.
  • 2Brown, R. How shall a thing be called [J]. Psychological Review, 1958, 65 ( 1 ) : 14-21.
  • 3Brown, R. Social Psychology[C]. New York: Free Press, 1965.
  • 4Hunn, E. S. A measure of the degree of correspondence of folk to seientitle biological classification [ J ]. American Ethnologist, 1975,2 ( 2 ) : 309 -327.
  • 5Hunn, E. S. Tzeltal Folk Zoology: The Classification of Discontinuities in Nature[ M]. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
  • 6Jaszczoh, K. M. Semantics and Pragmatics : Meaning in Language and Discourse [M]. Beijing : Peking University Press, 2004.
  • 7Lakoff, G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things : What Categories Reveal about the Mind [M]. Chicago/London : The University of Chieago Press, 1987.
  • 8Lyons, J. Linguistic Semantics : An Introduction [ M ]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.
  • 9Matthews, P. H. Oxford Concise Dictionary of Linguistics [ M ]. Shanghai: Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press, 2000.
  • 10Rosch, E. , et al. Basic objects in natural categories [J]. Cognitive Psychology, 1976, 8: 382-439.

二级参考文献16

  • 1沈家煊.语法研究的分析和综合[J].外语教学与研究,1999,31(2):1-7. 被引量:75
  • 2文旭.国外认知语言学研究综观[J].外国语,1999,22(1):35-41. 被引量:191
  • 3胡壮麟.语言·认知·隐喻[J].现代外语,1997,20(4). 被引量:346
  • 4维特根斯坦.哲学研究.《维特根斯坦全集》第8卷[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,2003.
  • 5Wittgenstein, L. Philosophische Untersuchungen in Wittgenstein Schrifien 1 [ Z ]. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag, 1969.
  • 6Dummett, M. The Interpretation of Frege' s Philosophy [ M ]. Cambridge, Massachusetts : Harvard University Press, 1981.
  • 7戴浩一.概念结构与非自主性语法:汉语语法概念系统初探[J].国外语言学,1990,(4).
  • 8[3]Haiman,J. Natural Syntax [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1985b.
  • 9[4]Labov, W, The Boundaries of Words and Their Meaning[A]. In C.-J. Bailey and R. W. Shuy(eds. ) New Ways of Analysing Variation in English[C]. Washington :Georgetown University Press, 1973.
  • 10[5]Lakoff,G. Hedges :A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts [J]. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 1973: 458-508.

共引文献227

同被引文献24

  • 1维特根斯坦 1945 陈嘉映译.哲学研究[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2001..
  • 2Berlin,B.,D.E.Breedlove,&P.H.Raven.Principles of Tzeltal Plant Classification:An Introduction to the Botanical Ethnography of a Mayan-Speaking People of Chiapas[M].New York:Academic Press,1974.
  • 3Brown,R.How shall a thing be called?[J].Psychological Review,1958(165):14-21.
  • 4Chomsky,N.Lectures on Government and Binding[M].Dordrecht:Foris,1981.
  • 5Fauconnier,G.&M.Turner.The Way We Think:Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities[M].New York:Basic Books,2002.
  • 6Hauser,M.D.,N.Chomsky&W.T.Fitch.The faculty of language:What is it,who has it,and how did it evolve?[J].Science,2002(298):1569-1579.
  • 7Huelva Unternbumen,E.2015.From primary metaphors to the complex semantic pole of grammatical constructions[J/OL].Language and Cognition,2015(1):68-97.http://journals.cambridge.org/LCO accessed 07/19/2016.
  • 8Lakoff,G.Women,Fire,and Dangerous Things:What Categories Reveal About the Mind[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1987.
  • 9Langacker,R.W.Foundations of Cognitive Grammar,vol.I:Theoretical Prerequisites[M].Stanford:Stanford University Press,1987.
  • 10Rosch,E.,C.B.Mervis,W.D.Gray,D.M.Johnson,&Penny Boyes-Braem.Basic objects in natural categories[J].Cognitive Psychology,1976(8):382-439.

引证文献1

二级引证文献12

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部