认知语言学研究的哲学思考

哲学是语言学研究的基石和摇篮,语言学派的分水岭最终可以追溯到不同的语言哲学和认知观,语言哲学最基本的问题即是语言与客观世界的关系问题。认知语言学是21世纪语言学研究的一个全新范式,是新兴的边缘学科和学术前沿。以G.Lakoff和M.Johnson为代表的认知语言学研究实现了从客观主义哲学观到经验现实主义哲学观的转变,这标志着人类意识形态和语言哲学的进步。     

乔姆斯基心理语言学理论概述

乔姆斯基语言学理论主要包括语言习得装置、内在化语言、外在化语言、句法结构、标准语法理论、扩展性标准理论等,他的语言学理论使心理学与语言学紧密结合起来,从而出现了一门交叉学科———语言心理学。与此同时也产生了心理语言学和社会心理语言学,由此可见乔姆斯基的语言学理论在心理语言学上的地位。     

语言学与品牌命名

近年来语言学被直接运用于服务经济发展与商业传播,语言学人力资源在该产业中发挥着巨大的作用,但是展示语言新产业———品牌命名,我国语言学研究与应用还存在不足。呼吁国内语言与语言学专家、学者对此给予关注、参与,把语言学理论及其研究成果应用到产品命名中,用语言学理论解决与语言有关的实际问题,让语言学研究为我国的经济建设做出应有的贡献。     

法律语言学研究综观

作为一门新兴学科,法律语言学研究已经取得了令世人瞩目的成就.我们首先概述法律语言学的兴起,总结出国内外界定法律语言学研究对象的三种学术观点(即法律属性、语言和法律的关系、法律语言的研究素材三个不同的研究立足点),综述法律语言学不同的研究方法和多元的学术视角即综合运用修辞学、逻辑学和心理学等学科的研究成果与方法,厘清国内外法律语言学在研究内容、研究方法、研究语料和研究条件等方面的差异.最后,从法律语言学的理论建构、研究方法、实践与应用等方面展望中国法律语言学未来的发展趋势.法律语言学综观研究旨在帮助国内法律语言研究者和语言学学者了解法律语言的研究状况,借鉴和吸收国内外法律语言研究的最新成果,加速我国法律语言学研究的步伐.     

论语言的结构与意义--20世纪语言学研究中的困境

20世纪的语言学者们在批判传统语法的同时,却忽略了语言结构和意义之间的复杂而微妙关系,使得不同的语言学流派寻求不同的解决方案。语言中思想或意义是认识论和哲学研究的范畴。如果要恪守语言学的自主性,那么就必须排除不属于语言学研究的方面,从而摆脱这一困境。     

艺术语言学刍议——兼论语言的张力与弹性

中国语言学由于受西方结构主义语言学理论影响,很长时间都无法跳出“为语言而研究语言”的藩篱,主要以语言的“结构形式与结构规律”为研究对象,使语言研究陷入公式化、程式化的尴尬境地.语言学崭新的分支——艺术语言学解释了源于说话者内心世界、满载美感信息的非规范化言语形式,从而弥补了传统语言学研究的不足.     

中西语言哲学"语用学转向"探索

哲学与语言有着密切的联系,语言哲学的发展促进了现代语言学的发展。本文探索“语用学转向”的思想渊源,分析构成传统与现代语用学的英、法、德、美以及中国的语用学思想,提出现代语用学转向建构的意义,揭示语用学转向为哲学与语言学发展的必然趋势,也为哲学与语用学带来新的思想与观念。     

论法律语言的意义和作用——自社会语言学跨领域的视角观察

长期以来,整个法律职业所通用的语言,无论是律师和法官在法庭上的用语,抑或是形诸于文字的法条用语,或与当事人权益有切身关系的法律文件的用语,甚至是法学院课堂上的,较之于一般日常生活中所使用的语言,无疑具有相当程度的特殊性。这点可以说是古今中外皆然。自从法律语言学的开山鼻祖DavidMellinkoff教授于上个世纪六十年代,题为TheLanguageoftheLaw(《法律的语言》)一书问世以来,无论是法学界、社会学学界、人类学抑或语言学学界莫不从法律语言学视为具有独立生命力的学科出发,开始重视法律语言的社会地位、功能以及属性。无疑地,正因为法律是一门专业性强、技术性亦高的职业,法律语言也就成了一种具有高度专业性和特殊性的语言,象征着一定的权力和社会地位。但是若试图仅以这点来概括一切,似有见树不见林之憾。本文有鉴于此,不仅立基于传统的社会语言学理论,更试图从“法律论述”(discourseanalysis)理论出发接近该问题,因为“法律论述”关心法律语言作为一种语言变体,其实际运用的场合与情境,牵动着诸多内外在、主客观的因素,一如国外的陪审团审判制度所显示。笔者在本文绪论中提出轮廓之后,接着第二部分再介绍语言的功能和作用并适时引入法律语言。继而第三部分围绕法律语言作为一种“语体”或“语码”(code)或“变体”(variety)的论点,针对诸多相关的社会语言学的复杂因素和理论,进行论述与比较。     

世纪之交的中国社会语言学——“九五”回顾和“十五”展望

:“九五”期间 ,中国社会语言学稳步发展 ,语言调查成绩显著 ,语言规范和语文立法研究获得重要突破 ,文化语言学渐趋成熟 ,言语交际和称谓问题研究成为热点 ,社会语言学理论和方法开始与国际接轨。但理论薄弱、方法简单、学风粗率等等缺陷依然制约着学科的发展。文章综述并分析了世纪之交中国社会语言学的现状 ,指出了其发展趋势 ,并提出了“十五”期间应注重研究的 1 5个主要课题     

语言阐释与语言文化研究——列·符·谢尔巴学术思想述评

谢尔巴研究领域非常广泛,他于语言阐释与语言文化的研究著作颇丰,其中最能反映其学术地位的是他在语音学和普通语言学方面的理论主张。创立了自己的音位理论,力求通过客观标准分离音位。提出在语言研究中应区分言语活动、语言系统和语言材料,并提出再现语言系统的语言学任务。     

欧美语言学发展进程中的几个重大转折点

要了解语言学的发展 ,就要了解历史比较语言学和结构主义语言学 ,而了解了历史比较语言学和结构主义语言学 ,就基本了解了欧美语言学发展的全貌。本文以时间顺序为脉络 ,选取了两大语言学理论———历史比较语言学和结构主义语言学发展中的几个重大转折点 ,介绍了其中重要人物的语言学思想、理论及方法 ,讨论了这些重要人物在推动语言学研究发展中的作用和意义     

Response to Elder‐Vass: “Seven Ways to be A Realist about Language”

Given that explicitly realist perspectives are currently quite unfashionable in applied linguistics, we very much welcome your thorough and careful discussion of the various forms they might take. We find the various categories you identify quite persuasive, and we find much to agree with in your characterisation of several of the positions you outline, particularly in the earlier part of the paper. However, we do take issue with aspects of your characterisation of both “social” and “linguistic systems” realism, and with some of the arguments you adduce particularly against the latter and in favour of your seventh way (“linguistic norm circles realism”). Our response, then, concentrates particularly on the challenges arising from these parts of your paper, and addresses: (1) the ways in which we may define language itself, for the purposes of this debate; (2) the distinction between social and linguistic norms; (3) the properties of language; (4) the role of empirical evidence; and (5) the methodological problems we find with the norm circle approach.     

The Epistemological Significance of the Theory of Social Representations

The theory of social representations must be understood in terms of its proper epistemology so that it can accomplish its full potential in social sciences. This is often difficult to achieve because researchers comprehend it in terms of concepts that are part of static and individualistic Newtonian epistemology rather than in terms of dynamic and relational Einsteinian epistemology. This article considers three signposts that Moscovici identifies and analyses in the theory of relativity, namely the relation between epistemology and science, theory and method, and the argument against the explanation of effects by their causes. The following question is posed: are these signposts also characteristic of the theory of social representations? This question is examined focusing on interactional epistemology, theory and method and the diversity of natural thinking and communication. Moscovici's Psychoanalysis shows that natural thinking appears in a plurality of modes according to the situation in which it takes place and according to social groups towards which it is directed. Natural thinking is controversial and communication‐centred. Different professionals, groups and lay people use different kinds of speaking and different communicative genres when they try to resolve “the same” problem. The article suggests that bringing together dialogicality, dialogical linguistics and the theory of social representations may open up new possibilities for theoretical developments in social psychology.     

关于Krashen的第二语言习得理论

Krashen的第二语言习得理论在语言教师中影响很广泛。然而作为一种理论 ,其理论过于简单化。构成其理论的五个假说在理论中存在着不科学性 ,在实践中常常难以验证。许多语言学家、第二语言习得理论学家、应用语言学家等对Krashen的理论提出了质疑。这些异议可以帮助语言教师更深入地理解语言习得理论和语言教学实践 ,在教学中更好地借鉴这一习得理论对语言教学的指导作用。     

Inner Speech as a Language: A Saussurean Inquiry

The idea that thinking is a form of talking to oneself was discussed in classical Greece, analyzed by the Medievals and treated as a central issue by the American pragmatists. But whether inner speech is a language unto itself, distinct from outer language, has not been determined. To this end I ask how Saussure's defining ideas about language apply to inner speech. I show that Saussure's ideas, while partly usable, are mainly a poor fit. Inner speech is a variety of language, or perhaps of dialect, with its own unique structure. Given that it is a unique window into human consciousness, I briefly discuss some of the research areas on which it sheds light.     

The limitations of the factor-analytical approach to psychology with special application to Cattell's research strategy

It is shown that Cattell's research strategy can be reduced to accepting the model of factor analysis: Cattell formalized the concept of trait, denning it as a factor and identified personality with a configuration of factors which can be obtained inductively from the empirical data. The main issue of the discussion lies therefore in cognitive consequences of factor analysis, whose merits and restrictions determine the value of Cattell's system. In particular, it is discussed why Cattell did not succeed with complete verification of his main hypothesis of the so-called indifference of media.Cattell's approach may be interpreted as an interesting attempt at the construction of a certain language in which expressions are formed according to rules determined by the choice of a particular program of factor analysis. Thus, one may say that Cattell constructed a semantics of personality theory. The discussion deals also with various aspects and consequences of this linguistic interpretation. In particular, the possibilities of application of the models of mathematical linguistics to psychology are analyzed.Received August, 1971     

语感和语言系统

语感是对于语言系统存在的心理感知,是一种语言心理现象,不是语言能力。语言系统存在于语感之中,表现为言语。语感有经验习得性、个人心理性、群体可通性、前理性、主观直觉性、可意会性和可验证的现实性等属性。语感研究既有理论意义,又有应用价值。应当确立语感在语言学理论的适当地位。