对后期维特根斯坦语境论的澄清

A Clarification of Later Wittgenstein's Contextualism

后期维特根斯坦文献中有不少关于语境的论述,很多学者就此把后期维特根斯坦放在当代语言哲学的语境论中来讨论。源于查尔斯·特拉维斯和詹姆斯·科南特等对后期维特根斯坦的语境研究,语境论者普遍把后期维特根斯坦视为激进的语境论者。阿尔贝托·伏托利尼、杰森·布里奇斯和丹尼尔·怀廷等人对此提出了质疑。文章就此讨论了后期维特根斯坦语境论争论的得失,指出这一争论实质是源于语义学和语用学在哲学上的不同视角,并阐述了把后期维特根斯坦作为哲学语用学以澄清语境论的理由。

In later Wittgenstein＇ s literature, there are many discussions tgenstein as a contextualist in terms of the contemporary philosophy of on context. Many scholars regard later Wit- language. Based on the study of later Witt- genstein by Charles Travis and James Conant, contextualists generally regard later Wittgenstein as a radical contex- tualist. Alberto Voltolini, Jason Bridges and Daniel Whiting questioned this view. This article discusses the pros and cons of later Wittgenstein＇ s arguments on contextualism, and claims that this argument arises actually from the different perspectives of semantics and pragmatics. It also argues that the contentions about context in later Wittgen- stein should not be seen as the problems of the contemporary contextualism but rather as philosophical pragmatics.