论语言超越及其辩证模式——梅洛-庞蒂“表达的悖论”与伽达默尔“理解的循环”之比较研究

Transcendence of Language and Its Dialectical Model:from Merleau-Ponty's“Paradoxes of Expression”to Gadamer's“Circle of Understanding”

语言之创造与沉淀的关系一直是语言哲学中一个充满悖论的问题:语言是纯粹创造的还是纯粹重复的?这是内在性与超越性之间矛盾的体现。理性主义和经验主义在这个问题上的尝试都是失败的。梅洛-庞蒂通过表达现象的悖论性来寻求一条中间的、辩证的道路,试图解决西方哲学史上本体论及语言观中内在性与超越性之间的矛盾,并发展出具身性的“表达-沉淀不对称循环结构”来阐明语言的创造性悖论。这与伽达默尔解释学中“理解的循环”互证,二者都是要从主观与客观、语言的创新性与公共性之间突围,并建构一个超越性的循环辩证结构。只不过前者在语言超越上比后者更为彻底。二者的方案为问题的解决提供了一种有效的思路。

The relationship between language creation and precipitation has always been a problem full of paradoxes in language philosophy:Is language purely creative or purely repetitive?This is the contradiction between immanence and transcendence.The attempts of rationalism and empiricism on this issue have all failed.Merleau-Ponty seeks a middle and dialectical way by the paradox of expression phenomena,trying to solve this contradiction of ontology and language view in the history of western philosophy,and develop the embodied“expression-sediment asymmetric circle structure”to clarify the language creative paradoxes.This is mutually evidenced by the“circle of understanding”in Gadamer's hermeneutics.Both of them want to break through the dichotomy between subjectivity and objectivity,and the innovation and publicity of language,and construct a transcendent circular dialectical structure,the former is more thorough than the latter in language transcendence.The two schemes provide an effective way to solve the contradiction.