期刊文献+

语言植物研究法的哲学溯源

The Philosophical Origin of Linguistic Botanizing
下载PDF
导出
摘要 语言植物研究法产生于二十世纪英美分析哲学中后期,是由牛津日常语言哲学流派开创的一种语言意义与概念分析的理论框架。通过对这一阶段哲学史发展的简要回顾,发现该理论框架是在牛津日常语言学派质疑以逻辑实证主义为代表的理想语言学派的哲学观、意义观的背景下展开的。在后期维特根斯坦思想的影响下,牛津日常语言学派提出了关注哲学语词在日常语言中的使用,并发现其所表达概念的细微区别与语言使用背后的逻辑的观点。澄清该理论框架的哲学渊源有助于理解当代语言学理论的发展脉络,为理论的进一步创新指出方向,具有方法论价值。 Linguistic botanizing is a theoretical framework for the analysis of linguistic meaning and concepts developed by the Oxford School of Ordinary Language Philosophy in the middle and late 20th century.With a brief review of the history of philosophy during this period,the paper traces back to the concept of the linguistic botanizing approach to meaning,and finds that the theoretical framework was developed under the background of the Oxford Ordinary Language School questioning the views to philosophy and meaning of the Ideal Language School represented by Logical Positivism.Under the influence of the late-Wittgenstein s thoughts,the Oxford Ordinary Language School put forward the idea of paying attention to the use of philosophical words in ordinary language and discovering the nuances of the concepts they express.Clarifying the philosophical origin of the theoretical framework is helpful to point out the direction of the innovation path of contemporary linguistic theory,the research has methodological value.
作者 宁建庚 NING Jiangeng(Center for Linguistics and Applied Linguistics,Guangdong University of Foreign Studies,Guangzhou 510410,China;Foreign Language Department,Yuncheng University,Yuncheng 044000,China)
出处 《运城学院学报》 2024年第4期67-72,共6页 Journal of Yuncheng University
基金 广东省教育厅高校青年优秀科研人才国际培养计划(20230505)。
关键词 语言植物研究法 逻辑实证主义 牛津日常语言哲学 Linguistic Botanizing approach Logical positivism Oxford Ordinary Language Philosophy
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献26

  • 1钱冠连.论工具性语言扩展式——西方语言哲学研究之八[J].语言科学,2003,2(3):23-33. 被引量:9
  • 2[1]Aristotle,BC.Categories[A].In W.D.Ross(ed.).The Works of Aristotle Translated into English,vol.1[C].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1950/350.
  • 3[2]Baker,G.P.& Hacker,P.M.S.Frege:Logical Excavations[M].New York:Oxford University Press,1984.
  • 4[3]Beaver,David I.Presupposition and Assertion in Dynamic Semantics[M].Stanford:CSLI,2001.
  • 5[4]Frege,G.On sense and reference[A].In Geach,P.& Black,M.(eds.) (1952).Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege[C].Oxford:Blackwell,1892.
  • 6[5]Frege,G.Letter to Husserl,9 December 1906[A].In M.Beaney (ed.).The Frege Reader[C].Oxford:Blackwell,1906.305-7.
  • 7[6]Frege,G.Logic[A].In Frege,G.(1979) Posthumous Writings[C].Oxford:Blackwell,1897:126-51.
  • 8[7]Frege,G.The thought:a logical inquiry[J].Mind,1918,55:289-311.
  • 9[8]Frege,G.Logical Investigations[M].Oxford:Blackwell,1977.
  • 10[9]Grice,H.P.logic and conversation[A].In Cole,P.& Morgan,J.(eds.).Syntax and Semantics 3:Speech Acts[C].London:Academic Press,1975:41-58.

共引文献40

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