对语境敏感性的不完全论证的辩护

In Defense of the Incompleteness Argument for Context-sensitivity

一个句子对语境是敏感的,关乎它在不同的上下文中不同的真值。上下文包括时间、地点、说话者以及其他语境要素(索引项)。哲学研究中有很普遍的语境论思考方式,认为几乎所有的句子都对语境敏感。语言哲学家H.Cappelen和E.Lepore批判了这种思考方式,认为语境论本身是自相矛盾的哲学主张。由于语境敏感性的不完全论证是语境论的基础,H.Cappelen和E.Lepore批判了它并且论证不完全论证会导致它的推论会与我们关于语言使用的直觉相悖。本文指出H.Cappelen和E.Lepore对不完全论证的反驳并不成立,我们的论证把语言分析和逻辑分析相结合,从而对语境敏感性的不完全论证进行辩护。

A sentence is context-sensative if it has different truth values relative to different contexts.The contexts of a sentence include moments,places,utterers and other context elements（indexicals）.Contextualism is a thinking paradigm prevailing in philosophical studies,which asserts that almost sentences in discourses are context-sensative.Language philosophers H.Cappelen,E.Lepore attacked contextualism and argued that this philosophical proposition will lead to internal contradiction.Because incompleteness argument is the very foundation of contextualism,H.Cappelen and E.Lepore criticized this argument,and tried to prove that the incompleteness argument does not accord with human intuitions in learning languages.This paper applys language analysis and logical analysis to disprove the arugment of Cappelen and Lepore and then defends the incompleteness argument.