期刊文献+

语言的界限:“情境论”视角下的布兰顿回指理论

The boundary of language:Brandon's anaphora theory from the perspective of situational theory
下载PDF
导出
摘要 通过回指理论提供的以“次语句”为核心的推论网络,布兰顿将“语言-世界”的关系转变为“语言-语言”的关系,为刻画指称关系提供了新进路。但是,布兰顿的回指理论面临两个主要困难:“指称不透明”和“回指不共指”。为了解决这两个问题,将采用雷卡纳蒂的“情境论”来优化回指理论,通过引入σ-异质结构来解决布兰顿回指理论面临的困难。首先,在回指链中插入情境算子以揭示句子的情境结构,严格区分句子的情境内容和语义内容;其次,厘清不同认知主体在不同情境中的回指链及其逻辑关系;最后,那些位于回指链之外无法穷尽的“最终视角”和无法还原的现实世界,同样以情境方式呈现出来。总之,在回指关系中“语言”“心灵”和“世界”都是必不可少的一环。 Through the inference network provided by the theory of anaphora,with"sub sentences"as the corer Brandon transformed the relationship between"language-world"into the relationship between"language-language',providing a new approach to characterize referential relationships.However,Brandon's theory of anaphora faces two main difficulties:"referential opacity"and"non co referential anaphora",To address these issues,Ricardo's"situational theory"will be adopted to optimize the theory of anaphora,introducingα-Heterogeneous structure is used to solve the difficulties faced by Brandon's anaphora theory.Firstly,modal operators are inserted into the anaphora chain to reveal the contextual structure of sentences,strictly distinguishing between the contextual and semantic content of sentencesi Secondly,clarify the anaphoric chains and their logical relationships of different cognitive subjects in different contextsi Finally,the inexhaustible"ultimate perspective"and the irreducible real world located outside the anaphora chain are also presented in a situational manner.In short,"language","mind",and"world"are essential components in anaphoric relationships.
作者 颜中军 尹沛 YAN Zhongjun;YIN Pei(School of Marxism,Hunan University of Science and Technology,Xiangtan 411201,China)
出处 《佛山科学技术学院学报(社会科学版)》 2024年第4期13-20,共8页 Journal of Foshan University(Social Science Edition)
基金 湖南省社会科学基金项目(23YBA132)。
关键词 布兰顿 回指理论 情境论 次语句 最终视角 Brandon anaphora theory situational theoryi sub-sentence final perspective
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献29

  • 1陈凡,彭康宁.新兴技术实践伦理的困境与应对[J].科学学研究,2023,41(1):11-17. 被引量:5
  • 2A.艾耶尔,伊丛.“能有私人语言吗?”[J].世界哲学,1994(5):48-50. 被引量:4
  • 3艾耶尔.《语言、真理与逻辑》,尹大贻译,上海译文出版社2006年版,第1、18-23、32-33、139页.
  • 4R. Brandom, Reason in Philosophy, Harvard University Press, 2009, p. 163.
  • 5布兰顿.《为什么真在哲学中并不重要?》[J].Reasonin Philosophy,2009,.
  • 6R. Brandom, Making It Explicit, Harvard University Press,1994, pp. 301 - 303.
  • 7R. Brandom, " Expressive vs. Explanatory Deflationism About Truth", in What Is Truth? R. Schantz (ed.), Hawthorne de Gruyter, 2002.
  • 8R. Brandom, " Expressive vs. Explanatory Deflationism About Truth", in What Is Truth? R. Schantz (ed.), Hawthorne de Gruyter, 2002.
  • 9R. Brandom, Making It Explicit, Harvard University Press, 1994, p. 89, p. 324.
  • 10R. Brandom, Making It Explicit, Harvard University Press, 1994, pp. 94 -95, pp. 105 - 107.

共引文献2

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