期刊文献+

零碎话语的认知语用研究 被引量:1

A Cognitive Pragmatic Study on Subsententials
下载PDF
导出
摘要 零碎话语的使用和理解受到不同学派语言学家的关注。首先指出零碎话语与省略句有着本质上的区别,其隐性可变量具有不可回溯性;零碎话语的理解因其极为有限的编码而需要语境因素的干预,是自由语用充实的结果;最后应用Fodor思维语假说的主要观点及其心智图式对零碎话语理解的心理过程进行阐释。Fodor认为是中枢系统对知觉系统和记忆或推理所得的思维语言表征进行加工和整合,这一理论有助于零碎话语语用充实的描述。 The use and interpretation of subsententials draw the focus of linguistics. By making a distinction between sub- sententials and ellipsis, the paper points out that the interpretation of subsententials is a pragmatically motivated process of free enrichment and is not traceable to a covert variable. Then Fodor's LOTH and picture of cognition are introduced to ex- plain the mental architecture and processing of interpreting subsententials
出处 《华侨大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 2012年第3期121-127,共7页 Journal of Huaqiao University(Philosophy & Social Sciences)
基金 中央高校基本科研业务费资助项目(10QSK13)
关键词 零碎话语 省略句 思维语 心智图式 语用充实 subsententials ellipsis mentalese picture of cognition pragmatic enrichment
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1Wittgenstein L. Philosophical Investigations (§1-44) [ M] //Baghramian, M. Modem Philosophy of Language University College Dublin. 1999.
  • 2Stanley J. Context and logical form [J]. Linguistics and Philosophy. 2000, (23).
  • 3Carston R. Relevance Theory and the Saying/Implicating Distinction [M] //Horn L R and Ward G. Handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell. 2004.
  • 4Recanati F. Literal Meaning [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
  • 5Stainton R. Words and Thoughts: Suhsentences, Ellipsis, and the Philosophy of Language[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
  • 6Barton E. Towards a nonsentential analysis in generative grammar [M] //Progovac L, Paesani K, Casielles E and Barton E. The Syntax of Nonsententials Muhidisciplinary perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjarains. 2006.
  • 7Hall A. Subsentential utterances, ellipsis, and pragmatic enrichment [J]. Pragmatics & Cognition, 2009, 17 (2).
  • 8孙飞凤.零碎话语理解的语用充实研究[J].东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),2011(6):101-103. 被引量:1
  • 9Elugardo R, R Stainton. Shorthand, syntactic ellipsis, and the pragmatic determinants of what is said [J]. Mind and Language, 2004, (19).
  • 10Fodor J. The Language of Thought [M]. New York : Thomas Crowell, 1975.

二级参考文献16

  • 1冉永平.词汇语用学及语用充实[J].外语教学与研究,2005,37(5):343-350. 被引量:174
  • 2[1]Jerry Fodor.The Elm and the Expert:Mentalese and its Semantics[M].Cambridge,Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1994.
  • 3[2]Jerry Fodor.The Language of Thought[M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1975:27.
  • 4[3]Jerry Fodor.Psychosemantics:The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind[M].Cambridge,Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1987.
  • 5[4]Murat Aydede.The Language of Thought Hypothesis,in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy[EB/OL].(2004-04-12)[2007-09-15].http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/language-thought.
  • 6[5]Jerry Fodor,Zenon Pylyshyn.Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture[M]//Pinker S,Mehler J.Connections and Symbols.Cambridge,Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1988:3-71.
  • 7[6]Jerry Fodor.In Critical Condition:Polemical Essays on Cognitive Science and the Philosophy of Mind[M].Cambridge,Massachusetts:The MIT Press,1998:63-73.
  • 8[7]Ansgar Beckermann.Can there be a Language of Thought[M]//Casati R,Smith B,White G.Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences.Proceedings of the 16th International Wittgenstein Symposium.Wien:Hilder-Pichler-Tempsky,1994.
  • 9[8]Barry Loewer,Georges Ray.Meaning in Mind:Fodor and his critics[M].Cambridge,Massachusetts:Basil Blackwell Ltd,1991.
  • 10[9]Larry Hauser.Doing Without Mentalese[J].Behavior and Philosophy,1995(23):42-47.

共引文献13

同被引文献13

引证文献1

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