维特根斯坦后期哲学视角下的语言学习
|
摘要
维特根斯坦后期哲学涉及了许多主题:如意义问题、理解问题、命题问题、逻辑问题、数学的基础、意识的状态,等等。维特根斯坦认为,如上的哲学问题的产生是因为人们不能正确地理解语言。我们可以把这些哲学困惑比作一种疾病,哲学的目的就是治疗这种疾病,因而,哲学的任务是治疗性的。
由于这种疾病源于人们对语言的误解,对这种疾病的治疗就在于更好、更清晰地理解语言的作用,用维特根斯坦的话说就是:要获得一个清晰的语言视景。为了达到他所谓的语言的“清晰视景”,他研究了许多语言使用不当的例子,尽管他的主要兴趣在于解决或消解这些哲学上的困惑,但他关于语言的论见的影响远远超出了他兴趣的范围,在许多方面产生重要的影响。像其他语言研究者一样,他为提供一个清晰的语言视景做出了建设性的贡献,并且他的贡献是极为突出的贡献。
出于哲学治疗的目的,维特根斯坦对语言学习进行研究,提出了许多富有开拓性的思想,如意义即使用,语言游戏,家族相似性、语言生活形式观等,这些思想的提出有效地瓦解了意义指称论,开启了语用学研究。但无论如何,维特根斯坦并不是一个语言学家,也不是一个心理学家或社会学家,他对这些领域的具体研究并不是非常感兴趣。语言学家、心理学家或社会学家以不同的方法研究语言的诸多细节,他们得出的原则或结论比维特根斯坦后期著作中所展现的观点详细的多。因此,本论文要研究的是,维特根斯坦对语言的研究和语言学家、心理学家以及社会学家对语言本质的研究有什么关系?换言之,维特根斯坦在语言研究中所得出的结论或观点和语言学家、心理学家、社会学家所得出的结论有什么相同和不同?
本论文从以下几个方面把维特根斯坦的研究同其他语言研究者的研究进行比较,比如维特根斯坦后期的语言思想同米德(George Herbert Mead)、杜威(JohnDewey)等实用主义者的观点就有许多相通之处,米德和杜威都从语用的角度来看待语言,他们都认为,语言是人与其生长环境相互作用的自然产物。他们把语言看作工具,人类主要通过语言才能进行相互合作,合作行动才得以实现。实用主义者主要关注的是语言的生物性质和社会性质。这些观点与维特根斯坦后期两个重要语言原则(central doctrine)相类似:1)语言的意义就是它的使用——意义即使用,我们能够用语言来做事,同样的语词在不同的情景中有着不同的意义;2)语言是人类的一种生活形式,我们什么都可以怀疑,就是不能怀疑我们赖以生活的生活方式。生活形式是我们一切语言活动的基础,我们所有的语言游戏都是在生活形式上展开。马林诺夫斯基在其有关土著人语言的研究《原始语言意义问题》发现了类似的结果,语言与活动不可分离,与语言相伴的语境和活动是语词的意义构成的不可分割的一部分。
维特根斯坦多次问:“我们是如何初次学会这个/那个词的?”维特根斯坦这样问旨在治疗、消解哲学上的困惑。通过这样的提问他想要证明:我们可以通过许许多多不同的场合来学习一个词——有许多各种不同的语境(contexts)或情景(situations)使我们获得一个词的正确用法。在维特根斯坦看来,试图寻找一个抽象的意义存在只不过是一种形而上学的冲动。当然,并不是所有的语言学家或语言哲学家都这样认为,比如内在主义语言学家如乔姆斯基就认为:人天生具有一个语言器官(language faulty),所有的人类语言都具有共同的语法——普遍语法(universal grammar),尽管环境因素在语言学习的过程当中不可或缺,但最终起决定作用的还是人类先天的语言器官,环境只不过是一种不可或缺的触发因素。语言研究的目的就是透过诸多语言现象对人类共同的语言器官进行研究。
乔姆斯基普遍语法理论的提出掀起了语言学界的革命,但生成语法在产生伊始就受到哲学界和语言学界人的质疑,据帕特曼,来自哲学界的质疑声音主要是受维特根斯坦思想的影响,在这些质疑声中,乔姆斯基的生成语法理论不断变化,以至于变得面目全非。迄今为止,生成语法学家们仍然没有找到一个所谓的各语言都适用的普遍语法。本论文对这种现象进行详细的分析,从维特根斯坦后期哲学思想的几个主要概念出发,对乔姆斯基的生成语法进行全面的对照研究。具体说来,这些比较研究可以归为以下几组概念的比较,绝对共性和家族相似性、普遍语法和哲学语法、语言奥秘和生活形式、内在语言和外在语言。
尽管维特根斯坦的“意义即使用”观点虽然对意义的形而上学进行了有效的瓦解,但作为一个独立的语言学科来说这远远不够,因为“使用”这个概念太宽泛。所谓宽泛,最重要的在于没有标识出使用符号和使用其他东西的差别,就是说没有突出“意义”。“意义即使用观”还使人想到语言研究中仅仅使用描述方法的局限,我们不可能穷尽一个词的所有用法。另外一个问题是“使用”似乎太多变了,“语言的结构是稳定的,用法是多变的。因此有理由说,是结构而不是用法决定了一种语言的同一性,规定了一种语言不同于另外一种语言。”语言学家研究的就是这些语言结构或语言规则,因为说到底语言的使用不同于泛泛的使用,而是一种规则辖制的行为。
我们还发现,虽然维特根斯坦在著作中多次对语言学习进行研究,但他没有对一些重要的概念进行区分,而这些区分在某种意义上是语言研究必不可少的一部分,如索绪尔的“语言(language)”和“言语(speech)”的区分,乔姆斯基的“语言能力(competence)”和“语言行为(performance)”之间的区分。语言学家的任务就是通过对“言语”或“语言行为”的研究达到对“语言”或“语言能力”的认识。我们认为这种区分在研究中是有必要的,首先明确研究的目标,我们才有可能进行有针对性的研究。
当然我们不能以一个语言学家的标准来要求维特根斯坦,因为维特根斯坦对建构什么理论从来不感兴趣,他要做的是“治疗”、“瓦解”的工作。作为一个顶级的哲学家,维特根斯坦的思想极具穿透力,他提出的一系列思想或哲学概念对人文诸多学科产生重要的影响,我们不可能要求他具体而微地像某一个学科如语言学为了研究或理论的建构进行一些术语区分,如果真是那样,反而与维特根斯坦的思想背道而驰了。作为一个学科,语言学研究不可能停留在泛泛的语言使用上,语言学家的研究就是要超越这些具体的用法,去发现辖制这些用法的规则,无论这些用法是乔姆斯基的先天规则还是实用主义如米德的社会建构。
我们同意并接受维特根斯坦的观点:研究语言的初发形式或语言的简单形式(simple form)对研究语言的复杂形式或语言的本质不可或缺。通过对儿童语言学习过程的研究,我们可以更好地理解语言的本质以及语言的作用。通过对这些具体细节的研究,我们可以更好理解维特根斯坦的相关的思想以及他的整个语言治疗方案。这也是本论文的重要目的之一。
Wittegenstein's later work deals with many subjects,such as the concepts of meaning, of understanding, of a proposition, of logic, the foundations of mathematics, states of consciousness, and other things. Wittgenstein maintained that certain problems have arisen in philosophy, problems connected with the subjects mentioned above, because of a failure to understand language. The philosophical perplexities accompanying these problems may be compared to an illness and the aim of philosophy, as he came to see it, is to treat this illness. Thus, the task of philosophy is therapeutic.
Since the source of the illness is due to a misunderstanding of language, the cure lies in coming to a clearer understanding of the functioning of language, or as Wittgenstein put it, to gain 'a clear view' of our language. In his attempt to gain a clear view of language, he investigated many inappropriate uses or misuses of language. Although his primary interest was in solving or dissolving various philosophical puzzles, his remarks about language, which deviate far from the boundaries of his special interest, have significant implications. Just like other language researchers, his constructive contributions are very impressive and outstanding in that it gives us a clear view of language.
To solve philosophical puzzles, Wittgenstein made a close research on language learning and put forward many pioneering thoughts, such as "the meaning of a word is its use"; "language game"; family resemblances"; "form of life". To a large extent, these concepts dissolved "referential theory of meaning" and opened a new field of the study of pragmatics, but on any account, he is not a linguist or a psychologist, nor a sociologist, he is not very interested in any of the above-mentioned fields. Compared with Wittgenstein, linguists, psychologists and sociologists make a more specific study of language from different perspectives and their research results or conclusions are much more specific than those demonstrated in Wittgenstein's works. Then, what's the relationship between Wittgenstein's study and the study of other related experts on the nature of language? In other words, what's the difference between their respective research results on the nature of language? These questions are exactly the focus of the present thesis.
The thesis makes several comparisons between Wittgenstein and other experts' research on the nature of language from different aspects. For example, Wittgenstein's view of language is similar to the pragmatic conception of language developed by such pragmatists as George Herbert Mead and John Dewey. Both Mead and Dewey saw language as an outgrowth of man's interaction with their environment. They saw language as a tool; its primary function being the realization of cooperative activity. They focus on the biological and sociological nature of language. This suggests a parallel to that of later Wittgenstein's two central doctrines: 1) "the meaning of a word is its use in language", we can use words to do things and the same word has different meaning in different contexts; 2) his notion that language is "a form of life". We can doubt all things but the "form of life", for it is the foundation of all our language activities. Malinowiski put forward a similar point of view in his The Problems of Meaning in Primitive Language: language is an integral part of human activities. Context and activities add up together to determine the meaning of a word.
Repeatedly in his later work Wittgenstein asked the question: "How do we first learn this or that word?" His use of this question is, in one sense, a therapeutic device. In asking how we first learn words, he wanted to show us that there are many kinds of occasions from which we can learn this or that word—that there are various contexts and situations which might have prompted our first correct use of the word. Hence, according to Wittgenstein, it is a metaphysical impulse to try to find an abstract object of meaning. Of course, not all linguists or philologists hold the same view. For example, internalists like Chomsky have a different point of view. Chomsky maintains that there is a language faculty in human mind, and that universal grammar exists in all human languages. Though language environment is indispensable in language acquisition, it is merely a triggering factor. It is the human language faculty that determines language acquisition. Thus, the target of language research should focus on the study of this human language faculty.
Chomsky's universal grammar theory brought about a linguistic revolution. But from the very beginning, generative grammar enterprise was questioned by many philosophers and linguists. According to Trevor Pateman, most of the different voices come from those philosophers who follow Wittgenstein. Being faced with so many challenges, Chomsky's theory have to change constantly, and some linguists even think it is quite different from what it used to be. So far, the generativists have not found a universal grammar that all human languages possess. We try to analyze and explain this phenomenon in the light of Wittgenstein's later philosophy. We focus on the comparisons between Wittgenstein's concepts and those of Chomsky's, namely, "absolute universals" and "family resemblance"; "universal grammar" and "philosophical grammar"; "language mystery" and "form of life"; "internal language" and "external language".
Though Wittgenstein's notion of "meaning is use" efficiently dissolved metaphysical meaning theory, it cannot satisfy the demands of the study of linguistics as an independent linguistic discipline, because the concept of "use" is too broad. Being too broad means that Wittgenstein didn't mark the difference between the use of signs and the use of other things, in other words, he didn't give prominence to "meaning".(CHEN Jiaying, 2003:190) The notion of "meaning is use" also tends to remind us of the limitations of the purely descriptive method in the study of language because we cannot even list all the uses of one word. Another related problem is that we cannot use a word as we would like to, as Wittgenstein's notion indicated. Hjelmslev says: "The structure of language is stable, while the use of a word is changeable. Thus, we can say that it is the structure rather than the use that determines the identity of a language. It is the structure that specifies one language different from another." The study of language structures or linguistic rules is exactly what the linguists are interested in, for, above all, language use is a rule-governed activity, so we must follow rules in our language activity.
In his later work, Wittgenstein made a close research on language learning, but he didn't distinguish between some important linguistic concepts, namely, the difference between "language" and "speech" as Saussure did, or the differnce between "language competence " and "language performance" as Chomsky did. The task of linguists is to find "language" or "language competence " through the study of language activity. We think the distinction is necessary in the study of language, especially in linguistic study, because only in this way can we specify the task of language research and make sure it can be carried out appropriately.
Of course we shouldn't request Wittgenstein to do as a linguist because he was never interested in the construction of any theory. What he tried to do was to dissolve philosophical puzzles. As one of the leading figures in philosophy, Wittgenstein's ideas had great penetrating power. A series of his philosophical concepts has exercised a profound influence on humanities. It is impossible for us to make strict demands on him as an expert in a specific field, making a distinction between some terms for the sake of theory construction as an a linguist does. As an independent subject, language study shouldn't rest upon the broad slogan "meaning is use". Linguists should go beyond the concrete uses of the words to find the rules behind that govern these different uses, whether they are an innate property in Chomsky's sense or a social construction in pragmatist Mead's sense.
We agree and accept Wittgenstein's point of view: it is indispensable for us to study the primitive language use to study complex language form or the nature of language. Through the study of the children's language learning, we can better understand Wittgenstein's related concept of language and his whole therapeutic program, which is one of the main goals the thesis aims to achieve.
由于这种疾病源于人们对语言的误解,对这种疾病的治疗就在于更好、更清晰地理解语言的作用,用维特根斯坦的话说就是:要获得一个清晰的语言视景。为了达到他所谓的语言的“清晰视景”,他研究了许多语言使用不当的例子,尽管他的主要兴趣在于解决或消解这些哲学上的困惑,但他关于语言的论见的影响远远超出了他兴趣的范围,在许多方面产生重要的影响。像其他语言研究者一样,他为提供一个清晰的语言视景做出了建设性的贡献,并且他的贡献是极为突出的贡献。
出于哲学治疗的目的,维特根斯坦对语言学习进行研究,提出了许多富有开拓性的思想,如意义即使用,语言游戏,家族相似性、语言生活形式观等,这些思想的提出有效地瓦解了意义指称论,开启了语用学研究。但无论如何,维特根斯坦并不是一个语言学家,也不是一个心理学家或社会学家,他对这些领域的具体研究并不是非常感兴趣。语言学家、心理学家或社会学家以不同的方法研究语言的诸多细节,他们得出的原则或结论比维特根斯坦后期著作中所展现的观点详细的多。因此,本论文要研究的是,维特根斯坦对语言的研究和语言学家、心理学家以及社会学家对语言本质的研究有什么关系?换言之,维特根斯坦在语言研究中所得出的结论或观点和语言学家、心理学家、社会学家所得出的结论有什么相同和不同?
本论文从以下几个方面把维特根斯坦的研究同其他语言研究者的研究进行比较,比如维特根斯坦后期的语言思想同米德(George Herbert Mead)、杜威(JohnDewey)等实用主义者的观点就有许多相通之处,米德和杜威都从语用的角度来看待语言,他们都认为,语言是人与其生长环境相互作用的自然产物。他们把语言看作工具,人类主要通过语言才能进行相互合作,合作行动才得以实现。实用主义者主要关注的是语言的生物性质和社会性质。这些观点与维特根斯坦后期两个重要语言原则(central doctrine)相类似:1)语言的意义就是它的使用——意义即使用,我们能够用语言来做事,同样的语词在不同的情景中有着不同的意义;2)语言是人类的一种生活形式,我们什么都可以怀疑,就是不能怀疑我们赖以生活的生活方式。生活形式是我们一切语言活动的基础,我们所有的语言游戏都是在生活形式上展开。马林诺夫斯基在其有关土著人语言的研究《原始语言意义问题》发现了类似的结果,语言与活动不可分离,与语言相伴的语境和活动是语词的意义构成的不可分割的一部分。
维特根斯坦多次问:“我们是如何初次学会这个/那个词的?”维特根斯坦这样问旨在治疗、消解哲学上的困惑。通过这样的提问他想要证明:我们可以通过许许多多不同的场合来学习一个词——有许多各种不同的语境(contexts)或情景(situations)使我们获得一个词的正确用法。在维特根斯坦看来,试图寻找一个抽象的意义存在只不过是一种形而上学的冲动。当然,并不是所有的语言学家或语言哲学家都这样认为,比如内在主义语言学家如乔姆斯基就认为:人天生具有一个语言器官(language faulty),所有的人类语言都具有共同的语法——普遍语法(universal grammar),尽管环境因素在语言学习的过程当中不可或缺,但最终起决定作用的还是人类先天的语言器官,环境只不过是一种不可或缺的触发因素。语言研究的目的就是透过诸多语言现象对人类共同的语言器官进行研究。
乔姆斯基普遍语法理论的提出掀起了语言学界的革命,但生成语法在产生伊始就受到哲学界和语言学界人的质疑,据帕特曼,来自哲学界的质疑声音主要是受维特根斯坦思想的影响,在这些质疑声中,乔姆斯基的生成语法理论不断变化,以至于变得面目全非。迄今为止,生成语法学家们仍然没有找到一个所谓的各语言都适用的普遍语法。本论文对这种现象进行详细的分析,从维特根斯坦后期哲学思想的几个主要概念出发,对乔姆斯基的生成语法进行全面的对照研究。具体说来,这些比较研究可以归为以下几组概念的比较,绝对共性和家族相似性、普遍语法和哲学语法、语言奥秘和生活形式、内在语言和外在语言。
尽管维特根斯坦的“意义即使用”观点虽然对意义的形而上学进行了有效的瓦解,但作为一个独立的语言学科来说这远远不够,因为“使用”这个概念太宽泛。所谓宽泛,最重要的在于没有标识出使用符号和使用其他东西的差别,就是说没有突出“意义”。“意义即使用观”还使人想到语言研究中仅仅使用描述方法的局限,我们不可能穷尽一个词的所有用法。另外一个问题是“使用”似乎太多变了,“语言的结构是稳定的,用法是多变的。因此有理由说,是结构而不是用法决定了一种语言的同一性,规定了一种语言不同于另外一种语言。”语言学家研究的就是这些语言结构或语言规则,因为说到底语言的使用不同于泛泛的使用,而是一种规则辖制的行为。
我们还发现,虽然维特根斯坦在著作中多次对语言学习进行研究,但他没有对一些重要的概念进行区分,而这些区分在某种意义上是语言研究必不可少的一部分,如索绪尔的“语言(language)”和“言语(speech)”的区分,乔姆斯基的“语言能力(competence)”和“语言行为(performance)”之间的区分。语言学家的任务就是通过对“言语”或“语言行为”的研究达到对“语言”或“语言能力”的认识。我们认为这种区分在研究中是有必要的,首先明确研究的目标,我们才有可能进行有针对性的研究。
当然我们不能以一个语言学家的标准来要求维特根斯坦,因为维特根斯坦对建构什么理论从来不感兴趣,他要做的是“治疗”、“瓦解”的工作。作为一个顶级的哲学家,维特根斯坦的思想极具穿透力,他提出的一系列思想或哲学概念对人文诸多学科产生重要的影响,我们不可能要求他具体而微地像某一个学科如语言学为了研究或理论的建构进行一些术语区分,如果真是那样,反而与维特根斯坦的思想背道而驰了。作为一个学科,语言学研究不可能停留在泛泛的语言使用上,语言学家的研究就是要超越这些具体的用法,去发现辖制这些用法的规则,无论这些用法是乔姆斯基的先天规则还是实用主义如米德的社会建构。
我们同意并接受维特根斯坦的观点:研究语言的初发形式或语言的简单形式(simple form)对研究语言的复杂形式或语言的本质不可或缺。通过对儿童语言学习过程的研究,我们可以更好地理解语言的本质以及语言的作用。通过对这些具体细节的研究,我们可以更好理解维特根斯坦的相关的思想以及他的整个语言治疗方案。这也是本论文的重要目的之一。
Wittegenstein's later work deals with many subjects,such as the concepts of meaning, of understanding, of a proposition, of logic, the foundations of mathematics, states of consciousness, and other things. Wittgenstein maintained that certain problems have arisen in philosophy, problems connected with the subjects mentioned above, because of a failure to understand language. The philosophical perplexities accompanying these problems may be compared to an illness and the aim of philosophy, as he came to see it, is to treat this illness. Thus, the task of philosophy is therapeutic.
Since the source of the illness is due to a misunderstanding of language, the cure lies in coming to a clearer understanding of the functioning of language, or as Wittgenstein put it, to gain 'a clear view' of our language. In his attempt to gain a clear view of language, he investigated many inappropriate uses or misuses of language. Although his primary interest was in solving or dissolving various philosophical puzzles, his remarks about language, which deviate far from the boundaries of his special interest, have significant implications. Just like other language researchers, his constructive contributions are very impressive and outstanding in that it gives us a clear view of language.
To solve philosophical puzzles, Wittgenstein made a close research on language learning and put forward many pioneering thoughts, such as "the meaning of a word is its use"; "language game"; family resemblances"; "form of life". To a large extent, these concepts dissolved "referential theory of meaning" and opened a new field of the study of pragmatics, but on any account, he is not a linguist or a psychologist, nor a sociologist, he is not very interested in any of the above-mentioned fields. Compared with Wittgenstein, linguists, psychologists and sociologists make a more specific study of language from different perspectives and their research results or conclusions are much more specific than those demonstrated in Wittgenstein's works. Then, what's the relationship between Wittgenstein's study and the study of other related experts on the nature of language? In other words, what's the difference between their respective research results on the nature of language? These questions are exactly the focus of the present thesis.
The thesis makes several comparisons between Wittgenstein and other experts' research on the nature of language from different aspects. For example, Wittgenstein's view of language is similar to the pragmatic conception of language developed by such pragmatists as George Herbert Mead and John Dewey. Both Mead and Dewey saw language as an outgrowth of man's interaction with their environment. They saw language as a tool; its primary function being the realization of cooperative activity. They focus on the biological and sociological nature of language. This suggests a parallel to that of later Wittgenstein's two central doctrines: 1) "the meaning of a word is its use in language", we can use words to do things and the same word has different meaning in different contexts; 2) his notion that language is "a form of life". We can doubt all things but the "form of life", for it is the foundation of all our language activities. Malinowiski put forward a similar point of view in his The Problems of Meaning in Primitive Language: language is an integral part of human activities. Context and activities add up together to determine the meaning of a word.
Repeatedly in his later work Wittgenstein asked the question: "How do we first learn this or that word?" His use of this question is, in one sense, a therapeutic device. In asking how we first learn words, he wanted to show us that there are many kinds of occasions from which we can learn this or that word—that there are various contexts and situations which might have prompted our first correct use of the word. Hence, according to Wittgenstein, it is a metaphysical impulse to try to find an abstract object of meaning. Of course, not all linguists or philologists hold the same view. For example, internalists like Chomsky have a different point of view. Chomsky maintains that there is a language faculty in human mind, and that universal grammar exists in all human languages. Though language environment is indispensable in language acquisition, it is merely a triggering factor. It is the human language faculty that determines language acquisition. Thus, the target of language research should focus on the study of this human language faculty.
Chomsky's universal grammar theory brought about a linguistic revolution. But from the very beginning, generative grammar enterprise was questioned by many philosophers and linguists. According to Trevor Pateman, most of the different voices come from those philosophers who follow Wittgenstein. Being faced with so many challenges, Chomsky's theory have to change constantly, and some linguists even think it is quite different from what it used to be. So far, the generativists have not found a universal grammar that all human languages possess. We try to analyze and explain this phenomenon in the light of Wittgenstein's later philosophy. We focus on the comparisons between Wittgenstein's concepts and those of Chomsky's, namely, "absolute universals" and "family resemblance"; "universal grammar" and "philosophical grammar"; "language mystery" and "form of life"; "internal language" and "external language".
Though Wittgenstein's notion of "meaning is use" efficiently dissolved metaphysical meaning theory, it cannot satisfy the demands of the study of linguistics as an independent linguistic discipline, because the concept of "use" is too broad. Being too broad means that Wittgenstein didn't mark the difference between the use of signs and the use of other things, in other words, he didn't give prominence to "meaning".(CHEN Jiaying, 2003:190) The notion of "meaning is use" also tends to remind us of the limitations of the purely descriptive method in the study of language because we cannot even list all the uses of one word. Another related problem is that we cannot use a word as we would like to, as Wittgenstein's notion indicated. Hjelmslev says: "The structure of language is stable, while the use of a word is changeable. Thus, we can say that it is the structure rather than the use that determines the identity of a language. It is the structure that specifies one language different from another." The study of language structures or linguistic rules is exactly what the linguists are interested in, for, above all, language use is a rule-governed activity, so we must follow rules in our language activity.
In his later work, Wittgenstein made a close research on language learning, but he didn't distinguish between some important linguistic concepts, namely, the difference between "language" and "speech" as Saussure did, or the differnce between "language competence " and "language performance" as Chomsky did. The task of linguists is to find "language" or "language competence " through the study of language activity. We think the distinction is necessary in the study of language, especially in linguistic study, because only in this way can we specify the task of language research and make sure it can be carried out appropriately.
Of course we shouldn't request Wittgenstein to do as a linguist because he was never interested in the construction of any theory. What he tried to do was to dissolve philosophical puzzles. As one of the leading figures in philosophy, Wittgenstein's ideas had great penetrating power. A series of his philosophical concepts has exercised a profound influence on humanities. It is impossible for us to make strict demands on him as an expert in a specific field, making a distinction between some terms for the sake of theory construction as an a linguist does. As an independent subject, language study shouldn't rest upon the broad slogan "meaning is use". Linguists should go beyond the concrete uses of the words to find the rules behind that govern these different uses, whether they are an innate property in Chomsky's sense or a social construction in pragmatist Mead's sense.
We agree and accept Wittgenstein's point of view: it is indispensable for us to study the primitive language use to study complex language form or the nature of language. Through the study of the children's language learning, we can better understand Wittgenstein's related concept of language and his whole therapeutic program, which is one of the main goals the thesis aims to achieve.
引文
[1]Anscombe,G.E.M.,1959p9
[2]施泰格缪勒,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆1992第67页
[1]陈嘉映,语言哲学,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p211
[1]目前我们知道的四个版本的翻译是:汤潮1992年译本,北京三联书店出版;李步楼1996年译本,北京商务出版社出版;陈嘉映2001年译本,上海人民出版社出版;蔡远2007年译本,北京九州出版社出版。
[2]钱冠连,《汉语文化语用学》,北京清华大学出版社2002第197页
[3]辛斌,《外语教学与研究》,2003年3期22-27
[1]Klein,Wolfgang,Second Language Acquisition,Cambridge:The University Press,1986p89
[2]施泰格缪勒,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆1992第66页
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p190
[2]《叶姆斯列夫语符学文集》,程琪龙译,长沙:湖南教育出版社,2006第40页
[1]这里的“规则”也是一个需要厘清的概念,它无论是不是乔姆斯基意义上的内在规则,都是语法学家所要研究的对象。
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第89页
[1]江蓝生,《近代汉语探源》,北京:商务印书馆,2000第87页
[2]沈家煊,《不对称和标记论》,南昌:江西教育出版社,1999第27页
[1]陈嘉映,《维特根斯坦的哲学观》,现代哲学,2006年5期
[2]Warnock,G.J.,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press,1961p63
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975Pⅳ
[4]Wittgenstein,Philosophical Investigations,translated by Anseombe,New York:Macmillan 1997,Pⅸe
[1]Warnock,G.J.,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press,1961p87
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第145页
[3]Findlay,John N.,1962,“The Teaching of Meaning”,Logique et Analyse,20p18
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第111页
[2]Russell,On Denoting,Mind 14,1905pp479--493
[3]Hartnack,Justus,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen,1965p11
[1]Hartnack,Justus,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen,1965p19
[2]Investigations,p.ⅹ
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p154
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p25
[2]Kripke,S.Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language,Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press1982
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第305页
[1]Sextus Empiricus,Outline of Pyrrhonism,Book 1 translated by R.G.Bury,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1955p9
[1]Malcolm,Norman,Ludwig Wittgenstein:A Memoir,London:Oxford University Press,1962p50
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p16
[2]Ibid.p17
[1]Findlay,John N.,“Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigation”,Revue Internationale de Philosophic Ⅶ:25,1953p207
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第187页
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p5
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第190页
[1]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963
[2]我们这里强调的是:就语词意义与活动的不可分而言,二者的语言观是相通的。
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p17
[1]Mead,George Herbert,Selected Writings,ed.By Andrew J.Reck,New York:Liberal Arts Press,1964p4
[2]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p46
[1]当然人们也可以说维氏的意思是:人们可以用同样的语词达到不同的目的,在这个意义上说“一个语词的意义是人给予的。”是有道理的。
[2]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p47
[3]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958pp186-187
[1]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p54
[2]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p5
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p4
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第193页
[2]王刚,《语言起源的一源论》,外语教学与研究,1994第15-18页
[1]俞喆,《概念中的日译词——以“科学”为关键词的研究》,华东师范大学博士论文(unpublished),2008
[2]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p184
[3]Ibid.p185
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第187页
[2]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p 187
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第196页
[1]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958pp188-189
[2]车铭洲,《英美语言哲学》,北京:三联书店,1993第59页
[1]F.de Saussure,Course in General Linguistics,translated by RoyHarris,外语教学与研究出版社,2001p9
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ibid.
[1]David Pole,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press,1963p92
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ullmann,Stephen,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blaekwell,1959pp302-303
[4]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960
[1]何兆熊,《新编语用学概要》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000第5页
[2]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960p87
[1]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2004第153页
[2]转引自周国平,《尼采——在世纪的转折点上》,上海:上海人民出版社,2005第192页
[1]乔姆斯基的语言学任务就是要对这内在的对语言使用起约束作用的语法规则进行清晰的描述,具体讨论详见第4章
[2]Wittgenstein.The Blue and Brown Books.Oxford:Basil Blackwell,197507
[3]对维特根斯坦关于“语法”与语言学意义上的“语法”的不同的研究可参看第4章3节
[1]涂纪亮,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究》,南京:江苏人民出版社,2005第10页
[2]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960p24
[3]Ibid.p30
[1]Ibid.p35
[2]Ibid.p36
[3]Ullmann,Stephen,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1959p 303
[4]Ibid.p305
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989
[2]Ibid.p305
[3]Ibid.p306
[4]Ibid.
[1]Firth,J.R.,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press,1964,p92
[1]Ibid.p93
[2]Firth,J.R.,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press,1964p101
[3]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p310
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p312
[2]Ibid.p312
[3]Antal,Laszlo,Content,Meaning,and Understanding,,The Hague:Mouton,1964p51
[1]Antal,Laszlo,Questions of Meaning,The Hague:Mouton,1963p52
[2]Dewey,J.Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p190
[1]更多的例子可以参看周振鹤,《逸言殊语》,上海人民出版社,2008第15-28页
[1]Findlay,John N.,The Teaching of Meaning,Logique et Analyse,20,1962p169
[1]Russell,An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth,Baltimore:Penguin Books,1965pp64-68
[2]Ibid.p62
[3]Ibid.p64
[4]洛克,《人类理解论》,关文运译,商务印书馆,1997第92页
[1]D.Bolinger,Aspects of Language,2nd edition,Harcourt,Brace,Jovanovich,New York,1975p187
[2]Jean Stilwell Peccei Child Language 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
[1]Jean Stilwell Peccei Child Language 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000p121
[1]Werner F.Leopold,1948b,Semantic Learning in Infant Speech,Word8p173
[2]陈嘉映,《说大小》,载于《无法还原的像》,华夏出版社2005
[3]Wittgenstein,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Belief,ed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1966p1
[4]Ibid.p2
[1]Ibid.
[2]Ibid.
[3]我们这样说是指,语言的创造性使用是有边界的,或者说语词本身就蕴含有如此的意义,我们只是把这些新颖的意义“发现出来”而已。
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p28
[1]艾耶尔(Ayer,A.J.),《语言、真理与逻辑》,尹大贻译,上海:上海译文出版社,1981第19页
[2]我们在特定的语境下学会了一个词的用法,这个词的意义是确定的明晰的,也可以说是如此的语境使得这个词如此的意义,但这个词其他的意义是如何获得的呢?我们反过来就会认为这个词的意义不可能是某个特定的语境给予的,具体可参考Ernest Gellner,Words and Things,pp30—37,London:Victor Gollancz,1963
[1]Morris,Charles W.,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press,1964p35
[1]马林诺夫斯在原始语言意义问题中对“实体范畴(real categories)”进行了讨论,他说“……所有的人类语言都具有基本的语法范畴,这种语法范畴只能通过语用指称才能得到理解。通过语言的使用,这些原始语言范畴一定对后来的人类哲学产生深远的影响。”(pp327-328)
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p77
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p77
[2]Ibid.p79
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p79-80
[2]Ibid.p81
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p81
[2]指哲学研究第二节和第八节中维特根斯坦列举的建筑工地语言和命令语言,这些语言的特点几乎都是独词句或者说是极其简单的语言形式。
[1]Blue Book,Pⅸ
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p80
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books,1963pp58-79
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p81
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition1958p107
[2]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975pp89-90
[1]陈嘉映,语言哲学,北京:北京大学出版社,2003pp304-321
[1]Morris,Charles W.,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unvcrsity of Chicagc Press,1964p44
[2]Ibid.p45
[3]Ibid.p47
[4]Ibid.p48
[1]Piaget,J.1974;Dale,P.1976,Language Development,NY:Holt,Rinehart and Wilson;B(?)n(?)dicte de Boysson-Bardies,1999;Peccei,J.S.2000
[2]Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini:Language and Learning,The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky,Harvard University Press,1980
[3]齐科,《第二次达尔文革命——用进化论解释人类学习的过程》,赖春,赵勇译,上海:华东师范大学出版社2007
[1]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2007第105页
[2]Alan Gardiner,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press,1960p7
[1]刘润清,《西方语言学流派》,外语教学与研究出版社2002第59页
[2]Saussure,Ferdinand de,Course in General Linguistics,ed.by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye,translated by Wade Baskin,北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001p9
[1]萨皮尔,《语言论:言语研究导论》,陆元卓译,北京:商务印书馆,1985第47-48页
[2]潘文国,《汉英语对比刚要》,第6章,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社,2004
[1]Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton1956p58
[2]Ibid.p60
[3]潘文国,《汉英语对比刚要》,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社2004第150-154页
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p247
[1]Sapir,E.,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World,1921p4
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p 15
[1]Ibid.pp16-19
[2]Ibid.p20
[3]Ibid.p25
[4]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p21
[1]Lewis,M.M.Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books,1963p24
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Infant Speech,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trubnerand Co.1936p7,
[3]Lewis,M.M.,,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963 p25
[4]Ibid.p65
[1]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p66
[2]Ibid.p67
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p287
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p80
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p31
[3]Mead,George Herbert,Mind,Self and Society,ed.By Charles W.Morris,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press 1963 p81,
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p320
[2]Ibid.p321
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p325
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p31
[3]Ibid.p321
[1]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p33
[2]Ibid.p49
[3]Ibid.p50
[1]Jeserson,Otto,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin 1959p 117
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p57
[3]Vygosky,G.J.,Thought and Language,translated by Eugenia Hanfmann and Gertrude Vakar,Cambridge:MIT Press1961p28
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p321
[2]Ibid.p322
[1]Lewis,M.M.,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books1959p118
[2]Jeserson,Otto,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin1959p121
[3]Lewis,M.M.,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books1959pp139-140
[1]Dewey,J.,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath 1910p233
[2]Ibid.p234
[3]Jakobson,Roman,and Morris Halle,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton1956pp55-82
[1]Goldstein,Kurt,Human Nature in the Light of Psychopathology,New York:Schoken Books1963pp59-60
[2]Ibid.p78
[3]Ibid.p79
[4]Ibid.p82
[1]Dewey,J.,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath 1910p235
[2]Goldstein,Kurt,The Growth of Concepts,in Language Thought and Culture,ed.by Paul Henle,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press 1965p36
[1]Wittgenstein,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Beliefed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell1966p10
[1]Trevor Pateman,Language in Mind and Language in Society,London:Clarendon Press,1987p120
[2]与乔姆斯基同时代的哲学家范畴语法学家蒙太古认为乔姆斯基和爱因斯坦是“二十世纪两个最伟大的骗子”,具体可参见蔡曙山《语言、逻辑与认知》,北京:清华大学出版社,2007年第153页
[3]具体看参看 Robert D.Levine and Paul M.Postal in The Anti Chomsky Reader,Peter Collier and David Horowitz,editors,London:Routledge2005
[1]J.Lyons,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press1969p3
[2]Chomsky,N.Language and Mind,Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,New York.1972p103,
[3]Chomsky,N.Langugage in a Psychological Setting,Sophia,Linguistica,22 1987p2,
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger 1986p3
[5]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press1988p3
[1]Reflections on Language,1976,Chapter4
[2]New Horizon,2002;Language and Problems of Knowledge,1988;Rules and Representations,1978
[3]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd 1976p137
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger1986p7
[1]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd1976p138
[2]Ibid.p140
[3]为使先天机制能够运作,其中人际交往是必要的,但是不能因此说这种交往就包括教授和训练,或者这种交往决定着获得系统的特点,具体讨论可参考Chomsky,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,1965,第1章第8节
[1]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd,1976p 148
[2]Ibid.p156
[3]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press1988p61
[1]Katz,J.J.,Language and Other Abstract Object,Oxford,Blackwell 1981 p12
[2]Ibid.p56
[3]Gerald Sanders,1980;Michael Kac,1980
[4]Chomsky,N.,Language and Thought,The Frick Collections 1993p39
[5]Chomsky,N.The Minimalist Program,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1995pp48-49
[1]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press 1980p7
[2]Ibid.p8
[3]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Carnbddge,Mass:MIT Press1988p8
[1]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press1980p76
[2]Rudolf P.Botha,Challenging Chomsky:The Generative Garden Game,London:Basil Blackwell Ltd,1991p8
[3]具体可参见帕特曼的《心智语言和社会语言》第4章
[1]Hilmmy,S.S.,The Later Wittgenstein,Oxford University Press1987p180
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell1985p239
[1]转引自Fromkin and Rodman(1983p15)
[1]Chomsky,N.Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese 19,1968p17
[2]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965pp28-30,
[3]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p131
[4]Ibid.
[5]从汉语的实例出发,潘文国提出了不同的意见,具体可参见其《汉英语对比刚要》第6章第1节
[1]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社2002第98页
[2]龚放,《外语学刊》,2001年4期第20-28页
[3]石定栩,《外国语》2007年4期第6-13页
[1]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p133
[1]陈嘉映,《哲学,科学与常识》,2007第97-126页
[2]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2004第92-93页
[1]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p137
[2]王广成,《外语学刊》,2002年第3期72-75
[3]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002第98页
[1]Comrie,B.Language Universals and Linguistic Typology,Brasil Blackwell,Oxford,1965p118
[2]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965p118
[3]Chomsky,N.The Generative Enterprise:A Discussin with Riny Huybregts and Huck van Riemsdijk,Dordrecht:Foris 1982p 111
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger 1986p21
[5]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002第103页
[1]按照标准的范畴分类理论(如Hemple and Oppenheim,1936),每个成员都必须得到明确的分类,每个成员都只能有一个类别,每个范畴的边界都必须是明确的,显然语言类型学远远没有达到这个标准。
[2]Saoir,E.,1921,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World,第6章
[3]离开语言使用去单独地抽象地研究语言是生成语法遭人诟病的另一面,下一节详论
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p321
[2]福多在先在语言知识观上比乔姆斯基走得更远,具体看参见其《思想语》(The Language of Thought),Thomas Y.Crowell Company,Inc.1975
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p324
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p321
[2]王广成,《从约束原则看生成语法对自然语言的共性研究———乔姆斯基的句法自立说评析》,外语学刊,2002第3期
[1]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger,1986p20
[1]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press,1988p36
[2]Chomsky,N.Linguistics and Adjacent Field:A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,1991p10
[3]Chomsky,N.,Transformational Grammar:past,present,and future,In Studies in English Language and Literature,Kyoto University,1987bpp33-80
[4]Chomsky,N.Linguistics and Adjacent Field.A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,1991p10
[5]Cook,V.J.乔姆斯基的普遍语法教程,外语教学与研究出版社,2000p22
[6]Chomsky N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass,1965p4
[7]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press,1980p59
[1]宁春岩,关于意义内在论,外语教学与研究,2000年第4期243-247
[1]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger1986p33
[2]可参考Newmeyer1983p75和Botha1981pp32-33对此问题的讨论
[3]周振鹤,游如杰,《方言与中国文化》,上海:上海人民出版社,2006第5页
[4]Dummett,M.What is a Theory of Meaning?:Part1.In Guttenplan(ed.) 1975pp134-145,
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社2003第190页
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社2003第185页
[1]R.Quirk,S.Greenbaum,G.Leech,J.Svartvik,A Grammar of Contemporary English(Longman,London,1974),pp.39f.,92ff.
[2]J.Lyons,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,1968p315
[3]本节关于维特根斯坦“哲学语法”部分思想来源于师弟王晓丰的有关课堂发言,特此标识
[1]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965p4
[2]Chomsky,N.‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.2006p1
[3]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger,1986pp19-56,
[1]Ibid.p22
[2]Ibid.p23
[3]Chomsky,N.2005‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36
[1]Chomsky,N.Language and Mind,Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,New York.1972p 102
[2]Ibid.p10
[3]Ibid.p79
[1]Ibid.p113
[2]Ibid.p153
[3]Chomsky,N.Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese19,1968p687
[4]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass1965pp200-201
[5]Dummett,M.Objections to Chomsky.London Review of Books,September,1981p56
[1]Chomsky,N.‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36,2005p1
[2]Chomsky,N.‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.2006p2
[1]所注均来自 The Collected Works of Ludwig Wittgenstein,Blackwell Publishers 1998电子版,下只表明页码
[2]Philosophical Grammar,p13
[3]Ibid.60
[4]Ibid.50
[5]Philosophical Remarks,p322
[6]Philosophical Grammar,p59
[7]Lectures on Philosophy,1932—1933,第二节
[1]Philosophical Grammar,p184
[2]《当代语言学》,2007年第2期
[3]Philosophical Grammar,p66
[4]Michael N.Forster,2004p7
[5]BT:136
[6]Ibid.138-139
[1]中华读书报,2002年8月28日第12版
[1]平克,《语言本能》,2004年第38页
[2]Ibid.p30
[3]邹为诚,《中国外语》,2008年第4期46-55
Alan Gardiner,1960,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press
Alexander George(ed),1989,Reflections on Chomsky,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,
Andrew Radford,2000,Syntax:A Minimalist Introduction,北京:外语教学与研究出版社
Andrew Radford,2002,Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English:A Minimalist Approach,北京:Peking University Press
Anscombe,G.E.M.1959,AnIntroductiontoWittgenstein's Tractatus,London:Hetchinson University Library
Antal,Laszlo,1963,Questions of Meaning,The Hague:Mouton
Antal,1964,Laszlo,Content,Meaning,and Understanding,The Hague:Mouton
Austin,J.L.1962,How to Do Things with Words,Oxford:Oxford University Press
Ayer,A.J.,1962,Philosophy and Language,Oxford:Oxford University Pres
G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,1985,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell
G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,1980,Understanding and Meaning,Basil Blackwell
B.Aginsky & E.Aginsky,,1967,On the Importance of Language Unversalsim Word22
B(?)n(?)dicte de Boysson-Bardies,1999,How Language Come to Children—from Birth to two Years,the MIT Press
Black,Max,1962,Dewey's Philosophy of Language,The Journal of Philosophy LIX;19
Bloomfield,1933,Leonard,Language,New York:Holt,Rinehart and Winston
Bloomfield,Leonard,1962,Linguistic Aspects of Science,Chicago:University of Chicago Press
Bolinger,D.&D.Sears,1981 Aspects of Language,New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,Inc.
Brown,Roger,1958,Words and Things,Glencoe:Free Press
Carroll,John B.,1965,Language and Thought,Englewood Cliff:Prentice-Hall
Chomsky,N.,1957,Syntactic Structure,The Hague:Mouton
Chomsky,N.1965,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.1968,Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese 19
Chomsky,N.1972,Language and Mind,,New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
Chomsky,N.,1976,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd
Chomsky,N.,1978/1980,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press
Chomsky,N.1981,Lectures on Government and Binding,Dordrecht:Foris
Chomsky,N.,1982,The Generative Enterprise:A Discussin with Riny Huybregts and Huck van Riemsdijk,Dordrecht:Foris
Chomsky,N.,1986,Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger
Chomsky,N.,1987,Langugage in a Psychological Setting,Sophia,Linguistica,22
Chomsky,N.,1987,Transformational Grammar:past,present,and future,In Studies in English Language and Literature,Kyoto University
Chomsky,N.,,1988,Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.1991,Linguistics and Adjacent Field:A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,
Chomsky,N.,1993,Language and Thought,The Frick Collections
Chomsky,N.1995,The Minimalist Program,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.2002,New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind,北京,外语教学与研究出版社
Chomsky,N.2006,‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.
Chomsky,N.2005‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36
Cohen,l.Jonathan,1963,The Diversity of Meaning,New York:Herder and Herder
Colin MacGinn,1984,Wittgenstein on Meaning:An Interpretation and Evaluation,Aristotelian Society Series,Volumel,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Comrie,B.1989,Language Universals and Linguistic Typology,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Cook,V.J.2000,乔姆斯基的普遍语法教程,北京:外语教学与研究出版社
C.P.Otero et.al.eds.,,2005,Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory,,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Dale,P.1976,Language Development,NY:Holt,Rinehart and Wilson
David Pole,1963,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press
Davidson,Donald&Harmon,Gilbert,eds.1972,Semantics of Natural Languages,Dordrech:D.Reidel
Dewey,J.,1910,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath
Dewey,J.1958,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications
Dewey,J.1960,Logic:The Theory of Inquiry,New York:Holt,Rinehart and Winston
Dewey,J.,Essays in Experimental Logic,New York:Dover Publications,n.d.
Dummett,M.1975,What is a Theory of Meaning?:Part1.In Guttenplan(ed.)
Dummett,M.1981,Objections to Chomsky.London Review of Books,September
F.de Saussure,2001,Course in General Linguistics,translated by Roy Harris,外语教学与研究出版社
Findlay,John N.,1953,“Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigation”,Revue Internationale de Philosophie Ⅶ:25
Findlay,John N.,1962,“The Teaching of Meaning”,Logique et Analyse,20
Firth,J.R.,1964,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press
Fromkin and Rodman,1983,An Introduction to Language,Holt,Reinehart and Winston
Gardiner,Sir Alan,1960,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press
Gordon Hunnings,1988,The World and Language in Wittgenstein's Philosophy,Hamspshire:Macmillan Press
Greenberg,J.(ed.),1966,Universals of language,Cambridge,MA:the MIT Press
Greenberg,J,1974,.Language Typology:A Historical and Analytic Overview,The Hague:Mouton
Geoffrey Sampson,1980,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd
Gellner,Ernest,1963,Words and Things,London:Viotor Gollancz
Gellner,Ernest,1964,“The Crisis in the Humanities and the Main Stream of Philosophy”,Crisis in the Humanities,ed.by J.H.Plun,Baltimore:Penguin Books
Goldstein,Kurt,1963,Human Nature in the Light of Psychopathology,New York:Schoken Books
Goldstein,Kurt,1965,The Growth of Concepts,in Language Thought and Culture,ed.by Paul Henle,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press
Hans-Johann Glock(ed),,2001,Wittgenstein:A Critical Reader,Blacwell Publishers
Hartnack,Justus,1965,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen
Hawkins,D.J.B.1957,“Wittgenstein and the Cult of Language”,Aquinas Society of London,London:Blackfriars
Hemple,c.g.& P.Oppenheim,,1936,Der Typusbergriff im Lichte Der Neuen Lojig.Leiden:Sijthoff
Henle,Paul(ed),1965,Language,Thought,and Culture,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press
Hilmmy,S.S.,1987,The Later Wittgenstein,Oxford University Press
Jacob Bronowski,1979,The Orgin of Knowledge,Yale University Press
Jakobson,Roman,and Morris Halle,1956,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton
Jakobson,Roman,1971,Studies on Child Language and Aphasia,the Hague:Mouton
Jeff Stickney,2008,Wittgenstein's ‘Relativity':Training in Language-gamens and Agreement in Forms of Life,Educational Philosophy and Theory,NO.5
Jerry Fodor,,1975,The Language of Thought,Thomas Y.Crowell Company,Inc
Jeserson,Otto,1959,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin
Kripke,S.1982,Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language,Cambridge Mass:Harvard University Press
Lennenberg,eric H.(ed)1966,New Directions in the Study of Language,Cambridge:M.I.T.Press
Laurence Goldstein,1999,Clear and Queer Thinking,New York:Roman & Littlefield Publishers,Inc.
Lenneberg,E.1967,Biological Foundations of Language,Wiley,New York.
Lewis,M.M.,1936,Infant Speech,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trubnerand Co.
Lewis,M.M.,1959,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books
Lewis,M.M.,1963,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books
Locke,J.1690/1975,An Essay on Human Understanding,ed.By Nidditch.Oxford Clarendon Press
Louise M.Antony and Norbert Hornstein(eds.),2003,Chomsky and his Critics,London:Blackwell
J.Lyons,1968,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
J.Lyons,1991,Chomsky,London:Fontana Press
J.R.Searl,1971,The Philosophy of Language,London:Oxford University Press
Katz,J.J.,1981,Language and Other Abstract Object,Oxford:Blackwell
J.R.Searle(ed.),1971,The Philosophy of Language,London:Oxford University Press
Bever,T.G.,1982,The Nonspecific Bases of Language,in Wanner and Gleitman(eds)
Malcolm,Norman,1962,Ludwig Wittgenstein:A Memoir,London:Oxford University Press
Malinnowski,Bronislaw,1989,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.
Mead,George Herbert,1963,Mind,Self and Society,ed.By Charles W.Morris,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Mead,George Herbert,1964,Selected Writings,ed.By Andrew J.Reck,New York:Liberal Arts Press
Meredith Williams,2002,Wittgenstein,Mind and Meaning:Towards a Social Conception of Mind,London:Routledge
Morris,Charles W.,1949,Sign,Language and Behaviour,New York:Prentice-Hall
Morris,Charles W.,1964,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Newmeyer,F.,1980,Linguistic Theory in America,New York:Academic Press
Newmeyer,F.,1995,Generative Linguistics:A Historical Perspective,New York:Routledge
Nell Smith and Deirde Wilsom,1979,Modern Linguistics:The Result of Chomsky's Revolution,Harvester Press
Newton Garver,2006,Philosophy as Grammar,in The Campanion to Wittgenstein,eds.by Hans Sluga,David G,Stem 北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店
Peccei,J.S.2000,儿童语言,外语教学与研究出版社
Piaget,J.,1963,The Language and Thought of the Child,translated by Marjorie Gabain,New York:Word Publishing Co.
Piaget,J.1974,The Language and Thought of Child,New York:New America Library
Piattelli-Palmarini,M.,1980,Language and Learning:The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky,Cambridge,MA,Harvard University Press
Pinker,S.,1984,Language Learnability and Language Development,Cambridge:Harvard University Press
Pitcher,George,1964,The Philosophy of Wittgenstein,Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall
P.M.S.Hacker,1998,Wittgenstein:Meaning and Mind,London:Blackwell Publishers Ltd
Putnam,H.,1967,“The Inateness Hypothesis and Explanatory Models in Linguistics”,Boston Sudies in the Philosophy of Science,New York,Humanities
Quine,Williard Varn Orman,1965,Word and Object,Cambridge:M.I.T.Press
R.Quirk,S.Greenbaum,G.Leech,J.Svartvik,1972,A Grammar of Contemporary English,Longman,London
Pitcher,David,1963,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press
Richards,I.A.,1965,Speculative Instruments,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Robin,R.H.1990,A Short History of Linguistics,Longman,London,
Robert D.Levine and Paul M.Postal,2005,A Corrupted Linguistics in The Anti-Chomsky Reader,Peter Collier and David Horowitz(ed.),London:Routledge
Roger Brown,1962,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition
Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle,1956,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton
Rorty,Richard,1961,“Pragmaticism,Categories,and Language”,Philosophical Review,LⅩⅩ
Roy Harris,1990,Language,Saussure and Wittgenstein:How to Play Games with Words,London:Routledge
Rudolf P.Botha,,1991,Challenging Chomsky:The Generative Garden Game,Basil Blackwell Ltd
Russell,Bertrand,1924,The Analysis of Mind,London:George Allen and Unwin
Russell,Bertrand,,1965,An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth,Baltimore:Penguin Books
Sapir,E.,1921,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World
Sapir,E.,1982,Langugae:An Introducton to the Study of Speech,London:Granada
Saussure,Ferdinand de,1959,Course in General Linguistics,ed.by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye,translated by Wade Baskin,New York:Pilosophical Library
Sextus Empiricus,1955,Outline of Pyrrhonism,Book 1 translated by R.G.Bury,Cambridge:Harvard University Press
Smith,N.2001,Chomsky:Ideas and Ideals,外语教学与研究出版社
Sohan Modgil&Celia Modgil(ed.),1987,Noam Chomsky:Consensus and Controversy,London:The Falmer Press
Stem,Gustaf,1931,Meaning and Change of Mmeaning,With Special Reference to the English Language,Gotenborg:Elanders Bokeryckeri Aktiebolag
Trevor Pateman,1987,Language in Mind and Language in Society,London:Clarendon Press
Ullmann,Stephen,1959,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Ullmann,Stephen,1964,Language and Style,Oxford:Basil Blackwel
Vygosky,G.J.,1961,Thought and Language,translated by Eugenia Hanfmann and Gertrude Vakar,Cambridge:MIT Press
Warnock,G.J.,1961,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press
Whiteley,C.H,1949,“On Understanding” Mind LⅧ
Werner F.Leopold,1948a,The Study of Child Language and Infant Bilingualism,Word4
Werner F.Leopold,1948b,Semantic Learning in Infant Speech,Word8
Wittgenstein,1974,Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus,London:Routledge and Kegan Paul
Wittgenstein,1997,Philosophical Investigations,translated by G.E.M.Anscomb,New York:Macmillan
Wittgenstein,1975,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,1966,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Beliefed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,On Certainty,,1969,eds.G.E.M.Anscombe and GH.von Wright,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,1974,Philosophical Grammar,ed.by Rush Rhees,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
爱德华·萨丕尔,2005,《语言论》,陆卓元译,北京:商务印书馆
安托尼·阿尔诺＆克洛德·朗斯诺,2002,《普遍唯理语法》,张学斌译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
奥托.叶斯柏森,2006,《叶斯柏森语言学选集》,任绍曾译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
奥托·叶斯柏森,1988,《语法哲学》,何勇等译,北京:语文出版社
阿尔斯顿(W.P.Alston),1988,《语言哲学》,牟博,刘鸿辉译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联出版社
布龙菲尔德,2004,《语言论》,袁家骅等译,北京:商务印书馆
蔡曙山,《语言·逻辑与认知》,2007,北京:清华大学出版社,
车铭洲(主编),《现代西方语言哲学》,成都:四川人民出版社,1989
车铭洲(主编),《现代西方语言哲学》,李连江译,天津:南开大学出版社,1989
陈嘉映,2007,《哲学 科学 常识》,北京:东方出版社
陈嘉映,2003,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社
陈嘉映,2005,《无法还原的像》,北京:华夏出版社
陈波,1998,《奎因哲学研究——从逻辑和语言的观点看》,北京:三联书店
程工,2002,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
葛兆光,2005,《中国思想史》(第二卷),上海:复旦大学出版社
何兆熊,2001,《语用学教程》,上海外语教育出版社
江蓝生,2000,《近代汉语探源》,北京:商务印书馆
科林.麦金,2007,《维特根斯坦与〈哲学研究〉》,李国山译,南宁:广西师范大学出版社
刘润清,2002,《西方语言学流派》,外语教学与研究出版社
A.P.马蒂尼奇,《语言哲学》(主编),1998,牟博,杨音莱,韩林合等译,北京:商务印书馆
洛克,1959,《人类理解论》,关文运译,北京:商务印书馆
罗曼.雅各布森,2001,《雅各布森文集》,钱军,王力译注,长沙:湖南教育出版社
米德,1992,《心灵,自我与社会》,赵月瑟译,上海:上海译文出版社
尼采,1939,《快乐的知识》,商务印书馆,民国28(出版地址不详)
潘文国,2004,《汉英语对比刚要》,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社
皮亚杰,1980,《儿童语言与思维》,傅统先译,北京:文化教育出版社
普特南,2005,《理性、真理与历史》,童世俊、李光程译,上海:上海译文出版社
平克,2004,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头:汕头大学出版社
钱冠连,2002,《汉语文化语用学》,北京:清华大学出版社
乔姆斯基,2009,《语言与心智》(影印本),北京:北京大学出版
G·齐科,2007,《第二次达尔文革命——用进化论解释人类学习的过程》,赖春,赵勇译,上海:华东师范大学出版社
沈家煊,1999,《不对称和标记论》,南昌:江西教育出版社
石毓智,2006,《语法的概念基础》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
施泰格缪勒,1987,《当代哲学主流》(上),王炳文等译,北京:商务印书馆
施泰格缪勒,1992,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆
孙周兴,1994,《说不可说之神秘:海德格尔后期思想研究》,上海:三联书店上海分店
涂纪亮(主编),2003,《维特根斯坦全集》,石家庄:河北教育出版社
涂纪亮,2005,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究》,南京:江苏人民出版社
王兆鹏(主编),2004,《中国古代文学作品选》,武汉:武汉大学出版社
维特根斯坦,2002,《哲学研究》,陈嘉映译,上海:上海人民出版社
吴刚,2006,《生成语法研究》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
希拉里·普特南,2005,《理性、真理与历史》,童世骏译,上海:上海译文出版社
徐烈炯,1988,《生成语法理论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
杨大春,2007,《语言 身体 他者》,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店
杨玉成,2002,《奥斯汀:语言现象学与哲学》,北京:商务印书馆
叶姆斯列夫(Hjelmslev,Lo),2006,《叶姆斯列夫语符学文集》,程琪龙译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
俞喆,2008,《概念中的日译词——以“科学”为关键词的研究》,华东师范大学博士论文(unpubli shed)
约翰·莱昂斯,1996,《诺姆·乔姆斯基》,杨光慈译,北京:商务印书馆
约翰·塞尔,2006,《心灵、语言和社会:实在世界中的哲学》,李步楼译,上海:上海译文出版社
约翰·塞尔,2006,《心、脑与科学》,杨音莱译,上海:上海译文出版社
周国平,2005,《尼采——在世纪的转折点上》,上海:上海人民出版社
周振鹤,2008,《逸言殊语》,上海:上海人民出版社
周振鹤,游如杰,2006,《中国方言与文化》,上海:上海人民出版社
陈嘉映,《维特根斯坦的哲学观》,现代哲学,2006.5
陈嘉映,《关于科学实在论的几点思考》,世界哲学,2006.6
陈嘉映,《反思哲学与汉语思维》,天涯,2004.3
陈嘉映,《从移植词看当代中国哲学》,同济大学学报(社会科学版)2005.4
代天善,李丹,《普遍语法的演变——从〈句法结构〉到“语言器官”》,2007.3
代天善,《唯理论、普遍论与进化论——乔姆斯基语言天赋论思想探源》,世界哲学,2007.5
范连义,《从生活形式到语言习得——对维特根斯坦后期哲学的一个思考》,西安外国语大学学报,2008.3
范连义,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想中的语用蕴含》,外语学刊,2008.5
范连义,《维特根斯坦的语言生活形式观》,外语学刊,2007.2
龚放,《认知语法的特点与生成语法之比较》,外语学刊,2001.4
胡长栓,《超越真理观的认识论视界》,自然辩证法研究,2004.11
李洪儒,《试论语词层级上的说话人形象——语言哲学系列探索之一》,外语学刊,2005.5
刘小涛,《乔姆斯基的“学习理论论证”与模块假设》,哲学研究2008.10
宁春岩,《关于意义内在论》,外语教学与研究,2000.4
石定栩,《生成转换语法的理论基础》,外国语,2007.4
石毓智,《乔姆斯基“普遍语法”假说的反证——来自认知心理学的启示》,解放军外国语学院学报,2005.1
孙自辉,《维特根斯坦遵从规则说及其对外语教学的启示》,中国外语,2008.4
王刚,《语言起源的一源论》,外语教学与研究,1994.2
魏博辉,《语言·哲学·哲学语言》,北京师范大学学报(社科版),1994.1
魏在江,《认知参照点与语用预设》,外语学刊,2008.3
王广成,《从约束原则看生成语法对自然语言的共性研究——乔姆斯基的句法自立说评析》,外语学刊,2002.3
辛斌,《意义的客观论与主观论》,解放军外国语学院学报,2002.3
辛斌,《当代语言研究中的游戏观》,外语教学与研究,2003.5
章雪富,《语言游戏和生活形式的相关分析》,杭州大学学报,1996.1
邹韶华,《论语言规范的理性原则和习性原则》,社会科学战线,2005.1
邹为诚,赵飞,《论二语习得理论的建设——兼评二语习得之问题》,中国外语,2008.5
朱志方,代天善,《普遍语法的几个问题》,外语学刊,2007.4
[2]施泰格缪勒,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆1992第67页
[1]陈嘉映,语言哲学,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p211
[1]目前我们知道的四个版本的翻译是:汤潮1992年译本,北京三联书店出版;李步楼1996年译本,北京商务出版社出版;陈嘉映2001年译本,上海人民出版社出版;蔡远2007年译本,北京九州出版社出版。
[2]钱冠连,《汉语文化语用学》,北京清华大学出版社2002第197页
[3]辛斌,《外语教学与研究》,2003年3期22-27
[1]Klein,Wolfgang,Second Language Acquisition,Cambridge:The University Press,1986p89
[2]施泰格缪勒,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆1992第66页
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p190
[2]《叶姆斯列夫语符学文集》,程琪龙译,长沙:湖南教育出版社,2006第40页
[1]这里的“规则”也是一个需要厘清的概念,它无论是不是乔姆斯基意义上的内在规则,都是语法学家所要研究的对象。
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第89页
[1]江蓝生,《近代汉语探源》,北京:商务印书馆,2000第87页
[2]沈家煊,《不对称和标记论》,南昌:江西教育出版社,1999第27页
[1]陈嘉映,《维特根斯坦的哲学观》,现代哲学,2006年5期
[2]Warnock,G.J.,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press,1961p63
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975Pⅳ
[4]Wittgenstein,Philosophical Investigations,translated by Anseombe,New York:Macmillan 1997,Pⅸe
[1]Warnock,G.J.,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press,1961p87
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第145页
[3]Findlay,John N.,1962,“The Teaching of Meaning”,Logique et Analyse,20p18
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第111页
[2]Russell,On Denoting,Mind 14,1905pp479--493
[3]Hartnack,Justus,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen,1965p11
[1]Hartnack,Justus,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen,1965p19
[2]Investigations,p.ⅹ
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003p154
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p25
[2]Kripke,S.Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language,Cambridge,Mass:Harvard University Press1982
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第305页
[1]Sextus Empiricus,Outline of Pyrrhonism,Book 1 translated by R.G.Bury,Cambridge:Harvard University Press,1955p9
[1]Malcolm,Norman,Ludwig Wittgenstein:A Memoir,London:Oxford University Press,1962p50
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p16
[2]Ibid.p17
[1]Findlay,John N.,“Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigation”,Revue Internationale de Philosophic Ⅶ:25,1953p207
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第187页
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p5
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第190页
[1]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963
[2]我们这里强调的是:就语词意义与活动的不可分而言,二者的语言观是相通的。
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p17
[1]Mead,George Herbert,Selected Writings,ed.By Andrew J.Reck,New York:Liberal Arts Press,1964p4
[2]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p46
[1]当然人们也可以说维氏的意思是:人们可以用同样的语词达到不同的目的,在这个意义上说“一个语词的意义是人给予的。”是有道理的。
[2]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p47
[3]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958pp186-187
[1]Gerorge Herbert Mead,Mind,Self and Society,ed.by Charles W.Morris,Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1963p54
[2]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p5
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p4
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第193页
[2]王刚,《语言起源的一源论》,外语教学与研究,1994第15-18页
[1]俞喆,《概念中的日译词——以“科学”为关键词的研究》,华东师范大学博士论文(unpublished),2008
[2]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p184
[3]Ibid.p185
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第187页
[2]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p 187
[3]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社,2003第196页
[1]Dewey,J.,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958pp188-189
[2]车铭洲,《英美语言哲学》,北京:三联书店,1993第59页
[1]F.de Saussure,Course in General Linguistics,translated by RoyHarris,外语教学与研究出版社,2001p9
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ibid.
[1]David Pole,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press,1963p92
[2]Ibid.
[3]Ullmann,Stephen,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blaekwell,1959pp302-303
[4]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960
[1]何兆熊,《新编语用学概要》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000第5页
[2]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960p87
[1]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2004第153页
[2]转引自周国平,《尼采——在世纪的转折点上》,上海:上海人民出版社,2005第192页
[1]乔姆斯基的语言学任务就是要对这内在的对语言使用起约束作用的语法规则进行清晰的描述,具体讨论详见第4章
[2]Wittgenstein.The Blue and Brown Books.Oxford:Basil Blackwell,197507
[3]对维特根斯坦关于“语法”与语言学意义上的“语法”的不同的研究可参看第4章3节
[1]涂纪亮,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究》,南京:江苏人民出版社,2005第10页
[2]Charles W.Morris,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1960p24
[3]Ibid.p30
[1]Ibid.p35
[2]Ibid.p36
[3]Ullmann,Stephen,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1959p 303
[4]Ibid.p305
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989
[2]Ibid.p305
[3]Ibid.p306
[4]Ibid.
[1]Firth,J.R.,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press,1964,p92
[1]Ibid.p93
[2]Firth,J.R.,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press,1964p101
[3]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p310
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p312
[2]Ibid.p312
[3]Antal,Laszlo,Content,Meaning,and Understanding,,The Hague:Mouton,1964p51
[1]Antal,Laszlo,Questions of Meaning,The Hague:Mouton,1963p52
[2]Dewey,J.Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications,1958p190
[1]更多的例子可以参看周振鹤,《逸言殊语》,上海人民出版社,2008第15-28页
[1]Findlay,John N.,The Teaching of Meaning,Logique et Analyse,20,1962p169
[1]Russell,An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth,Baltimore:Penguin Books,1965pp64-68
[2]Ibid.p62
[3]Ibid.p64
[4]洛克,《人类理解论》,关文运译,商务印书馆,1997第92页
[1]D.Bolinger,Aspects of Language,2nd edition,Harcourt,Brace,Jovanovich,New York,1975p187
[2]Jean Stilwell Peccei Child Language 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000
[1]Jean Stilwell Peccei Child Language 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2000p121
[1]Werner F.Leopold,1948b,Semantic Learning in Infant Speech,Word8p173
[2]陈嘉映,《说大小》,载于《无法还原的像》,华夏出版社2005
[3]Wittgenstein,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Belief,ed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1966p1
[4]Ibid.p2
[1]Ibid.
[2]Ibid.
[3]我们这样说是指,语言的创造性使用是有边界的,或者说语词本身就蕴含有如此的意义,我们只是把这些新颖的意义“发现出来”而已。
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p28
[1]艾耶尔(Ayer,A.J.),《语言、真理与逻辑》,尹大贻译,上海:上海译文出版社,1981第19页
[2]我们在特定的语境下学会了一个词的用法,这个词的意义是确定的明晰的,也可以说是如此的语境使得这个词如此的意义,但这个词其他的意义是如何获得的呢?我们反过来就会认为这个词的意义不可能是某个特定的语境给予的,具体可参考Ernest Gellner,Words and Things,pp30—37,London:Victor Gollancz,1963
[1]Morris,Charles W.,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press,1964p35
[1]马林诺夫斯在原始语言意义问题中对“实体范畴(real categories)”进行了讨论,他说“……所有的人类语言都具有基本的语法范畴,这种语法范畴只能通过语用指称才能得到理解。通过语言的使用,这些原始语言范畴一定对后来的人类哲学产生深远的影响。”(pp327-328)
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p77
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p77
[2]Ibid.p79
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p79-80
[2]Ibid.p81
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p81
[2]指哲学研究第二节和第八节中维特根斯坦列举的建筑工地语言和命令语言,这些语言的特点几乎都是独词句或者说是极其简单的语言形式。
[1]Blue Book,Pⅸ
[1]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p80
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books,1963pp58-79
[3]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975p81
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition1958p107
[2]Wittgenstein,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,1975pp89-90
[1]陈嘉映,语言哲学,北京:北京大学出版社,2003pp304-321
[1]Morris,Charles W.,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unvcrsity of Chicagc Press,1964p44
[2]Ibid.p45
[3]Ibid.p47
[4]Ibid.p48
[1]Piaget,J.1974;Dale,P.1976,Language Development,NY:Holt,Rinehart and Wilson;B(?)n(?)dicte de Boysson-Bardies,1999;Peccei,J.S.2000
[2]Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini:Language and Learning,The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky,Harvard University Press,1980
[3]齐科,《第二次达尔文革命——用进化论解释人类学习的过程》,赖春,赵勇译,上海:华东师范大学出版社2007
[1]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2007第105页
[2]Alan Gardiner,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press,1960p7
[1]刘润清,《西方语言学流派》,外语教学与研究出版社2002第59页
[2]Saussure,Ferdinand de,Course in General Linguistics,ed.by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye,translated by Wade Baskin,北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2001p9
[1]萨皮尔,《语言论:言语研究导论》,陆元卓译,北京:商务印书馆,1985第47-48页
[2]潘文国,《汉英语对比刚要》,第6章,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社,2004
[1]Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton1956p58
[2]Ibid.p60
[3]潘文国,《汉英语对比刚要》,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社2004第150-154页
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p247
[1]Sapir,E.,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World,1921p4
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p 15
[1]Ibid.pp16-19
[2]Ibid.p20
[3]Ibid.p25
[4]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p21
[1]Lewis,M.M.Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books,1963p24
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Infant Speech,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trubnerand Co.1936p7,
[3]Lewis,M.M.,,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963 p25
[4]Ibid.p65
[1]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p66
[2]Ibid.p67
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p287
[1]Roger Brown,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition 1962p80
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p31
[3]Mead,George Herbert,Mind,Self and Society,ed.By Charles W.Morris,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press 1963 p81,
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p320
[2]Ibid.p321
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p325
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p31
[3]Ibid.p321
[1]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books1963p33
[2]Ibid.p49
[3]Ibid.p50
[1]Jeserson,Otto,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin 1959p 117
[2]Lewis,M.M.,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books 1963p57
[3]Vygosky,G.J.,Thought and Language,translated by Eugenia Hanfmann and Gertrude Vakar,Cambridge:MIT Press1961p28
[1]Malinnowski,Bronislaw,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.1989p321
[2]Ibid.p322
[1]Lewis,M.M.,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books1959p118
[2]Jeserson,Otto,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin1959p121
[3]Lewis,M.M.,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books1959pp139-140
[1]Dewey,J.,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath 1910p233
[2]Ibid.p234
[3]Jakobson,Roman,and Morris Halle,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton1956pp55-82
[1]Goldstein,Kurt,Human Nature in the Light of Psychopathology,New York:Schoken Books1963pp59-60
[2]Ibid.p78
[3]Ibid.p79
[4]Ibid.p82
[1]Dewey,J.,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath 1910p235
[2]Goldstein,Kurt,The Growth of Concepts,in Language Thought and Culture,ed.by Paul Henle,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press 1965p36
[1]Wittgenstein,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Beliefed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell1966p10
[1]Trevor Pateman,Language in Mind and Language in Society,London:Clarendon Press,1987p120
[2]与乔姆斯基同时代的哲学家范畴语法学家蒙太古认为乔姆斯基和爱因斯坦是“二十世纪两个最伟大的骗子”,具体可参见蔡曙山《语言、逻辑与认知》,北京:清华大学出版社,2007年第153页
[3]具体看参看 Robert D.Levine and Paul M.Postal in The Anti Chomsky Reader,Peter Collier and David Horowitz,editors,London:Routledge2005
[1]J.Lyons,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press1969p3
[2]Chomsky,N.Language and Mind,Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,New York.1972p103,
[3]Chomsky,N.Langugage in a Psychological Setting,Sophia,Linguistica,22 1987p2,
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger 1986p3
[5]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press1988p3
[1]Reflections on Language,1976,Chapter4
[2]New Horizon,2002;Language and Problems of Knowledge,1988;Rules and Representations,1978
[3]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd 1976p137
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger1986p7
[1]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd1976p138
[2]Ibid.p140
[3]为使先天机制能够运作,其中人际交往是必要的,但是不能因此说这种交往就包括教授和训练,或者这种交往决定着获得系统的特点,具体讨论可参考Chomsky,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,1965,第1章第8节
[1]Chomsky,N.,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd,1976p 148
[2]Ibid.p156
[3]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press1988p61
[1]Katz,J.J.,Language and Other Abstract Object,Oxford,Blackwell 1981 p12
[2]Ibid.p56
[3]Gerald Sanders,1980;Michael Kac,1980
[4]Chomsky,N.,Language and Thought,The Frick Collections 1993p39
[5]Chomsky,N.The Minimalist Program,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1995pp48-49
[1]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press 1980p7
[2]Ibid.p8
[3]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Carnbddge,Mass:MIT Press1988p8
[1]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press1980p76
[2]Rudolf P.Botha,Challenging Chomsky:The Generative Garden Game,London:Basil Blackwell Ltd,1991p8
[3]具体可参见帕特曼的《心智语言和社会语言》第4章
[1]Hilmmy,S.S.,The Later Wittgenstein,Oxford University Press1987p180
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell1985p239
[1]转引自Fromkin and Rodman(1983p15)
[1]Chomsky,N.Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese 19,1968p17
[2]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965pp28-30,
[3]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p131
[4]Ibid.
[5]从汉语的实例出发,潘文国提出了不同的意见,具体可参见其《汉英语对比刚要》第6章第1节
[1]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社2002第98页
[2]龚放,《外语学刊》,2001年4期第20-28页
[3]石定栩,《外国语》2007年4期第6-13页
[1]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p133
[1]陈嘉映,《哲学,科学与常识》,2007第97-126页
[2]平克,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头大学出版社,2004第92-93页
[1]Geoffrey Sampson,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd,1980p137
[2]王广成,《外语学刊》,2002年第3期72-75
[3]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002第98页
[1]Comrie,B.Language Universals and Linguistic Typology,Brasil Blackwell,Oxford,1965p118
[2]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965p118
[3]Chomsky,N.The Generative Enterprise:A Discussin with Riny Huybregts and Huck van Riemsdijk,Dordrecht:Foris 1982p 111
[4]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger 1986p21
[5]程工,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002第103页
[1]按照标准的范畴分类理论(如Hemple and Oppenheim,1936),每个成员都必须得到明确的分类,每个成员都只能有一个类别,每个范畴的边界都必须是明确的,显然语言类型学远远没有达到这个标准。
[2]Saoir,E.,1921,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World,第6章
[3]离开语言使用去单独地抽象地研究语言是生成语法遭人诟病的另一面,下一节详论
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p321
[2]福多在先在语言知识观上比乔姆斯基走得更远,具体看参见其《思想语》(The Language of Thought),Thomas Y.Crowell Company,Inc.1975
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p324
[1]G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell,1985p321
[2]王广成,《从约束原则看生成语法对自然语言的共性研究———乔姆斯基的句法自立说评析》,外语学刊,2002第3期
[1]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger,1986p20
[1]Chomsky,N.Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press,1988p36
[2]Chomsky,N.Linguistics and Adjacent Field:A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,1991p10
[3]Chomsky,N.,Transformational Grammar:past,present,and future,In Studies in English Language and Literature,Kyoto University,1987bpp33-80
[4]Chomsky,N.Linguistics and Adjacent Field.A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,1991p10
[5]Cook,V.J.乔姆斯基的普遍语法教程,外语教学与研究出版社,2000p22
[6]Chomsky N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass,1965p4
[7]Chomsky,N.,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press,1980p59
[1]宁春岩,关于意义内在论,外语教学与研究,2000年第4期243-247
[1]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger1986p33
[2]可参考Newmeyer1983p75和Botha1981pp32-33对此问题的讨论
[3]周振鹤,游如杰,《方言与中国文化》,上海:上海人民出版社,2006第5页
[4]Dummett,M.What is a Theory of Meaning?:Part1.In Guttenplan(ed.) 1975pp134-145,
[1]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社2003第190页
[2]陈嘉映,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社2003第185页
[1]R.Quirk,S.Greenbaum,G.Leech,J.Svartvik,A Grammar of Contemporary English(Longman,London,1974),pp.39f.,92ff.
[2]J.Lyons,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,1968p315
[3]本节关于维特根斯坦“哲学语法”部分思想来源于师弟王晓丰的有关课堂发言,特此标识
[1]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass.1965p4
[2]Chomsky,N.‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.2006p1
[3]Chomsky,N.Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger,1986pp19-56,
[1]Ibid.p22
[2]Ibid.p23
[3]Chomsky,N.2005‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36
[1]Chomsky,N.Language and Mind,Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,New York.1972p 102
[2]Ibid.p10
[3]Ibid.p79
[1]Ibid.p113
[2]Ibid.p153
[3]Chomsky,N.Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese19,1968p687
[4]Chomsky,N.Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,MIT Press,Cambridge Mass1965pp200-201
[5]Dummett,M.Objections to Chomsky.London Review of Books,September,1981p56
[1]Chomsky,N.‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36,2005p1
[2]Chomsky,N.‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.2006p2
[1]所注均来自 The Collected Works of Ludwig Wittgenstein,Blackwell Publishers 1998电子版,下只表明页码
[2]Philosophical Grammar,p13
[3]Ibid.60
[4]Ibid.50
[5]Philosophical Remarks,p322
[6]Philosophical Grammar,p59
[7]Lectures on Philosophy,1932—1933,第二节
[1]Philosophical Grammar,p184
[2]《当代语言学》,2007年第2期
[3]Philosophical Grammar,p66
[4]Michael N.Forster,2004p7
[5]BT:136
[6]Ibid.138-139
[1]中华读书报,2002年8月28日第12版
[1]平克,《语言本能》,2004年第38页
[2]Ibid.p30
[3]邹为诚,《中国外语》,2008年第4期46-55
Alan Gardiner,1960,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press
Alexander George(ed),1989,Reflections on Chomsky,Oxford:Basil Blackwell,
Andrew Radford,2000,Syntax:A Minimalist Introduction,北京:外语教学与研究出版社
Andrew Radford,2002,Syntactic Theory and the Structure of English:A Minimalist Approach,北京:Peking University Press
Anscombe,G.E.M.1959,AnIntroductiontoWittgenstein's Tractatus,London:Hetchinson University Library
Antal,Laszlo,1963,Questions of Meaning,The Hague:Mouton
Antal,1964,Laszlo,Content,Meaning,and Understanding,The Hague:Mouton
Austin,J.L.1962,How to Do Things with Words,Oxford:Oxford University Press
Ayer,A.J.,1962,Philosophy and Language,Oxford:Oxford University Pres
G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,1985,Wittgenstein:Rules,Grammar & Necessity,Basil Blackwell
G.P.Backer & P.M.S.Hacker,1980,Understanding and Meaning,Basil Blackwell
B.Aginsky & E.Aginsky,,1967,On the Importance of Language Unversalsim Word22
B(?)n(?)dicte de Boysson-Bardies,1999,How Language Come to Children—from Birth to two Years,the MIT Press
Black,Max,1962,Dewey's Philosophy of Language,The Journal of Philosophy LIX;19
Bloomfield,1933,Leonard,Language,New York:Holt,Rinehart and Winston
Bloomfield,Leonard,1962,Linguistic Aspects of Science,Chicago:University of Chicago Press
Bolinger,D.&D.Sears,1981 Aspects of Language,New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,Inc.
Brown,Roger,1958,Words and Things,Glencoe:Free Press
Carroll,John B.,1965,Language and Thought,Englewood Cliff:Prentice-Hall
Chomsky,N.,1957,Syntactic Structure,The Hague:Mouton
Chomsky,N.1965,Aspects of the Theory of Syntax,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.1968,Quine's Empirical Assumptions,Synthese 19
Chomsky,N.1972,Language and Mind,,New York:Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
Chomsky,N.,1976,Reflections on Language,London:Maurice Temple Smith Ltd
Chomsky,N.,1978/1980,Rules and Representations,New York:Columbia University Press
Chomsky,N.1981,Lectures on Government and Binding,Dordrecht:Foris
Chomsky,N.,1982,The Generative Enterprise:A Discussin with Riny Huybregts and Huck van Riemsdijk,Dordrecht:Foris
Chomsky,N.,1986,Knowledge of Language:Its Nature,Origin and Use,New York:Praeger
Chomsky,N.,1987,Langugage in a Psychological Setting,Sophia,Linguistica,22
Chomsky,N.,1987,Transformational Grammar:past,present,and future,In Studies in English Language and Literature,Kyoto University
Chomsky,N.,,1988,Language and Problems of Knowledge,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.1991,Linguistics and Adjacent Field:A Personal View,In A.Kasher(ed.),The Chomskyan Turn,Oxford:Blackwell,
Chomsky,N.,1993,Language and Thought,The Frick Collections
Chomsky,N.1995,The Minimalist Program,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Chomsky,N.2002,New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind,北京,外语教学与研究出版社
Chomsky,N.2006,‘Approaching UG from below',unpublished paper,MIT.
Chomsky,N.2005‘Three factors in language design',Linguistic Inquiry 36
Cohen,l.Jonathan,1963,The Diversity of Meaning,New York:Herder and Herder
Colin MacGinn,1984,Wittgenstein on Meaning:An Interpretation and Evaluation,Aristotelian Society Series,Volumel,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Comrie,B.1989,Language Universals and Linguistic Typology,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Cook,V.J.2000,乔姆斯基的普遍语法教程,北京:外语教学与研究出版社
C.P.Otero et.al.eds.,,2005,Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory,,Cambridge Mass:MIT Press
Dale,P.1976,Language Development,NY:Holt,Rinehart and Wilson
David Pole,1963,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press
Davidson,Donald&Harmon,Gilbert,eds.1972,Semantics of Natural Languages,Dordrech:D.Reidel
Dewey,J.,1910,How We Think,New York:D.C.Heath
Dewey,J.1958,Experience and Nature,New York:Dover Publications
Dewey,J.1960,Logic:The Theory of Inquiry,New York:Holt,Rinehart and Winston
Dewey,J.,Essays in Experimental Logic,New York:Dover Publications,n.d.
Dummett,M.1975,What is a Theory of Meaning?:Part1.In Guttenplan(ed.)
Dummett,M.1981,Objections to Chomsky.London Review of Books,September
F.de Saussure,2001,Course in General Linguistics,translated by Roy Harris,外语教学与研究出版社
Findlay,John N.,1953,“Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigation”,Revue Internationale de Philosophie Ⅶ:25
Findlay,John N.,1962,“The Teaching of Meaning”,Logique et Analyse,20
Firth,J.R.,1964,The Tongues of Men and Speech,London:Oxford University Press
Fromkin and Rodman,1983,An Introduction to Language,Holt,Reinehart and Winston
Gardiner,Sir Alan,1960,The Theory of Speech and Language,London:Oxford University Press
Gordon Hunnings,1988,The World and Language in Wittgenstein's Philosophy,Hamspshire:Macmillan Press
Greenberg,J.(ed.),1966,Universals of language,Cambridge,MA:the MIT Press
Greenberg,J,1974,.Language Typology:A Historical and Analytic Overview,The Hague:Mouton
Geoffrey Sampson,1980,Schools of Linguistics,Hutchinson & Co.(Publishers)Ltd
Gellner,Ernest,1963,Words and Things,London:Viotor Gollancz
Gellner,Ernest,1964,“The Crisis in the Humanities and the Main Stream of Philosophy”,Crisis in the Humanities,ed.by J.H.Plun,Baltimore:Penguin Books
Goldstein,Kurt,1963,Human Nature in the Light of Psychopathology,New York:Schoken Books
Goldstein,Kurt,1965,The Growth of Concepts,in Language Thought and Culture,ed.by Paul Henle,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press
Hans-Johann Glock(ed),,2001,Wittgenstein:A Critical Reader,Blacwell Publishers
Hartnack,Justus,1965,Wittgenstein and Modern Philosophy,translated by Maurice Cranston,London Methuen
Hawkins,D.J.B.1957,“Wittgenstein and the Cult of Language”,Aquinas Society of London,London:Blackfriars
Hemple,c.g.& P.Oppenheim,,1936,Der Typusbergriff im Lichte Der Neuen Lojig.Leiden:Sijthoff
Henle,Paul(ed),1965,Language,Thought,and Culture,Ann Arbor:University of Michigan Press
Hilmmy,S.S.,1987,The Later Wittgenstein,Oxford University Press
Jacob Bronowski,1979,The Orgin of Knowledge,Yale University Press
Jakobson,Roman,and Morris Halle,1956,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton
Jakobson,Roman,1971,Studies on Child Language and Aphasia,the Hague:Mouton
Jeff Stickney,2008,Wittgenstein's ‘Relativity':Training in Language-gamens and Agreement in Forms of Life,Educational Philosophy and Theory,NO.5
Jerry Fodor,,1975,The Language of Thought,Thomas Y.Crowell Company,Inc
Jeserson,Otto,1959,Language:Its Nature,Development and Origin,London:George Allen and Unwin
Kripke,S.1982,Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language,Cambridge Mass:Harvard University Press
Lennenberg,eric H.(ed)1966,New Directions in the Study of Language,Cambridge:M.I.T.Press
Laurence Goldstein,1999,Clear and Queer Thinking,New York:Roman & Littlefield Publishers,Inc.
Lenneberg,E.1967,Biological Foundations of Language,Wiley,New York.
Lewis,M.M.,1936,Infant Speech,London:Kegan Paul,Trench,Trubnerand Co.
Lewis,M.M.,1959,How Children Learn to Speak,New York:Basic Books
Lewis,M.M.,1963,Language,Thought and Personality in Infancy and Childhood,New York:Basic Books
Locke,J.1690/1975,An Essay on Human Understanding,ed.By Nidditch.Oxford Clarendon Press
Louise M.Antony and Norbert Hornstein(eds.),2003,Chomsky and his Critics,London:Blackwell
J.Lyons,1968,Introductions to Theoretical Linguistics,Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
J.Lyons,1991,Chomsky,London:Fontana Press
J.R.Searl,1971,The Philosophy of Language,London:Oxford University Press
Katz,J.J.,1981,Language and Other Abstract Object,Oxford:Blackwell
J.R.Searle(ed.),1971,The Philosophy of Language,London:Oxford University Press
Bever,T.G.,1982,The Nonspecific Bases of Language,in Wanner and Gleitman(eds)
Malcolm,Norman,1962,Ludwig Wittgenstein:A Memoir,London:Oxford University Press
Malinnowski,Bronislaw,1989,The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages,in C.K.Ogden and I.A.Richards,The Meaning of Meaning,New York:Harcourt,Brace and Co.
Mead,George Herbert,1963,Mind,Self and Society,ed.By Charles W.Morris,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Mead,George Herbert,1964,Selected Writings,ed.By Andrew J.Reck,New York:Liberal Arts Press
Meredith Williams,2002,Wittgenstein,Mind and Meaning:Towards a Social Conception of Mind,London:Routledge
Morris,Charles W.,1949,Sign,Language and Behaviour,New York:Prentice-Hall
Morris,Charles W.,1964,Foundations of the Theory of Signs,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Newmeyer,F.,1980,Linguistic Theory in America,New York:Academic Press
Newmeyer,F.,1995,Generative Linguistics:A Historical Perspective,New York:Routledge
Nell Smith and Deirde Wilsom,1979,Modern Linguistics:The Result of Chomsky's Revolution,Harvester Press
Newton Garver,2006,Philosophy as Grammar,in The Campanion to Wittgenstein,eds.by Hans Sluga,David G,Stem 北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店
Peccei,J.S.2000,儿童语言,外语教学与研究出版社
Piaget,J.,1963,The Language and Thought of the Child,translated by Marjorie Gabain,New York:Word Publishing Co.
Piaget,J.1974,The Language and Thought of Child,New York:New America Library
Piattelli-Palmarini,M.,1980,Language and Learning:The Debate between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky,Cambridge,MA,Harvard University Press
Pinker,S.,1984,Language Learnability and Language Development,Cambridge:Harvard University Press
Pitcher,George,1964,The Philosophy of Wittgenstein,Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall
P.M.S.Hacker,1998,Wittgenstein:Meaning and Mind,London:Blackwell Publishers Ltd
Putnam,H.,1967,“The Inateness Hypothesis and Explanatory Models in Linguistics”,Boston Sudies in the Philosophy of Science,New York,Humanities
Quine,Williard Varn Orman,1965,Word and Object,Cambridge:M.I.T.Press
R.Quirk,S.Greenbaum,G.Leech,J.Svartvik,1972,A Grammar of Contemporary English,Longman,London
Pitcher,David,1963,The Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein,London:Athlone Press
Richards,I.A.,1965,Speculative Instruments,Chicago:Unversity of Chicage Press
Robin,R.H.1990,A Short History of Linguistics,Longman,London,
Robert D.Levine and Paul M.Postal,2005,A Corrupted Linguistics in The Anti-Chomsky Reader,Peter Collier and David Horowitz(ed.),London:Routledge
Roger Brown,1962,“Language and Categories”,in Jerome S.Bruner,Jacqueline J.Goodnow,and George A.Austin,A Study of Thinking,New York:Science Edition
Roman Jakobson and Morris Halle,1956,Fundamentals of Language,The Hague:Mouton
Rorty,Richard,1961,“Pragmaticism,Categories,and Language”,Philosophical Review,LⅩⅩ
Roy Harris,1990,Language,Saussure and Wittgenstein:How to Play Games with Words,London:Routledge
Rudolf P.Botha,,1991,Challenging Chomsky:The Generative Garden Game,Basil Blackwell Ltd
Russell,Bertrand,1924,The Analysis of Mind,London:George Allen and Unwin
Russell,Bertrand,,1965,An Inquiry into Meaning and Truth,Baltimore:Penguin Books
Sapir,E.,1921,Language,New York,Harcourt,Brace and World
Sapir,E.,1982,Langugae:An Introducton to the Study of Speech,London:Granada
Saussure,Ferdinand de,1959,Course in General Linguistics,ed.by Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye,translated by Wade Baskin,New York:Pilosophical Library
Sextus Empiricus,1955,Outline of Pyrrhonism,Book 1 translated by R.G.Bury,Cambridge:Harvard University Press
Smith,N.2001,Chomsky:Ideas and Ideals,外语教学与研究出版社
Sohan Modgil&Celia Modgil(ed.),1987,Noam Chomsky:Consensus and Controversy,London:The Falmer Press
Stem,Gustaf,1931,Meaning and Change of Mmeaning,With Special Reference to the English Language,Gotenborg:Elanders Bokeryckeri Aktiebolag
Trevor Pateman,1987,Language in Mind and Language in Society,London:Clarendon Press
Ullmann,Stephen,1959,The Principle of Semantics,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Ullmann,Stephen,1964,Language and Style,Oxford:Basil Blackwel
Vygosky,G.J.,1961,Thought and Language,translated by Eugenia Hanfmann and Gertrude Vakar,Cambridge:MIT Press
Warnock,G.J.,1961,Englishi Philosophy since 1900,London:Oxford University Press
Whiteley,C.H,1949,“On Understanding” Mind LⅧ
Werner F.Leopold,1948a,The Study of Child Language and Infant Bilingualism,Word4
Werner F.Leopold,1948b,Semantic Learning in Infant Speech,Word8
Wittgenstein,1974,Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus,London:Routledge and Kegan Paul
Wittgenstein,1997,Philosophical Investigations,translated by G.E.M.Anscomb,New York:Macmillan
Wittgenstein,1975,The Blue and Brown Books,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,1966,Lectures and Conversations on Aaesthetics,Psychology and Religions Beliefed.by Cyrill Barrett,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,On Certainty,,1969,eds.G.E.M.Anscombe and GH.von Wright,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
Wittgenstein,1974,Philosophical Grammar,ed.by Rush Rhees,Oxford:Basil Blackwell
爱德华·萨丕尔,2005,《语言论》,陆卓元译,北京:商务印书馆
安托尼·阿尔诺＆克洛德·朗斯诺,2002,《普遍唯理语法》,张学斌译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
奥托.叶斯柏森,2006,《叶斯柏森语言学选集》,任绍曾译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
奥托·叶斯柏森,1988,《语法哲学》,何勇等译,北京:语文出版社
阿尔斯顿(W.P.Alston),1988,《语言哲学》,牟博,刘鸿辉译,北京:生活·读书·新知三联出版社
布龙菲尔德,2004,《语言论》,袁家骅等译,北京:商务印书馆
蔡曙山,《语言·逻辑与认知》,2007,北京:清华大学出版社,
车铭洲(主编),《现代西方语言哲学》,成都:四川人民出版社,1989
车铭洲(主编),《现代西方语言哲学》,李连江译,天津:南开大学出版社,1989
陈嘉映,2007,《哲学 科学 常识》,北京:东方出版社
陈嘉映,2003,《语言哲学》,北京:北京大学出版社
陈嘉映,2005,《无法还原的像》,北京:华夏出版社
陈波,1998,《奎因哲学研究——从逻辑和语言的观点看》,北京:三联书店
程工,2002,《语言共性论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
葛兆光,2005,《中国思想史》(第二卷),上海:复旦大学出版社
何兆熊,2001,《语用学教程》,上海外语教育出版社
江蓝生,2000,《近代汉语探源》,北京:商务印书馆
科林.麦金,2007,《维特根斯坦与〈哲学研究〉》,李国山译,南宁:广西师范大学出版社
刘润清,2002,《西方语言学流派》,外语教学与研究出版社
A.P.马蒂尼奇,《语言哲学》(主编),1998,牟博,杨音莱,韩林合等译,北京:商务印书馆
洛克,1959,《人类理解论》,关文运译,北京:商务印书馆
罗曼.雅各布森,2001,《雅各布森文集》,钱军,王力译注,长沙:湖南教育出版社
米德,1992,《心灵,自我与社会》,赵月瑟译,上海:上海译文出版社
尼采,1939,《快乐的知识》,商务印书馆,民国28(出版地址不详)
潘文国,2004,《汉英语对比刚要》,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社
皮亚杰,1980,《儿童语言与思维》,傅统先译,北京:文化教育出版社
普特南,2005,《理性、真理与历史》,童世俊、李光程译,上海:上海译文出版社
平克,2004,《语言本能》,洪兰译,汕头:汕头大学出版社
钱冠连,2002,《汉语文化语用学》,北京:清华大学出版社
乔姆斯基,2009,《语言与心智》(影印本),北京:北京大学出版
G·齐科,2007,《第二次达尔文革命——用进化论解释人类学习的过程》,赖春,赵勇译,上海:华东师范大学出版社
沈家煊,1999,《不对称和标记论》,南昌:江西教育出版社
石毓智,2006,《语法的概念基础》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
施泰格缪勒,1987,《当代哲学主流》(上),王炳文等译,北京:商务印书馆
施泰格缪勒,1992,《当代哲学主流》(下),燕宏远等译,北京:商务印书馆
孙周兴,1994,《说不可说之神秘:海德格尔后期思想研究》,上海:三联书店上海分店
涂纪亮(主编),2003,《维特根斯坦全集》,石家庄:河北教育出版社
涂纪亮,2005,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想研究》,南京:江苏人民出版社
王兆鹏(主编),2004,《中国古代文学作品选》,武汉:武汉大学出版社
维特根斯坦,2002,《哲学研究》,陈嘉映译,上海:上海人民出版社
吴刚,2006,《生成语法研究》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
希拉里·普特南,2005,《理性、真理与历史》,童世骏译,上海:上海译文出版社
徐烈炯,1988,《生成语法理论》,上海:上海外语教育出版社
杨大春,2007,《语言 身体 他者》,北京:生活·读书·新知三联书店
杨玉成,2002,《奥斯汀:语言现象学与哲学》,北京:商务印书馆
叶姆斯列夫(Hjelmslev,Lo),2006,《叶姆斯列夫语符学文集》,程琪龙译,长沙:湖南教育出版社
俞喆,2008,《概念中的日译词——以“科学”为关键词的研究》,华东师范大学博士论文(unpubli shed)
约翰·莱昂斯,1996,《诺姆·乔姆斯基》,杨光慈译,北京:商务印书馆
约翰·塞尔,2006,《心灵、语言和社会:实在世界中的哲学》,李步楼译,上海:上海译文出版社
约翰·塞尔,2006,《心、脑与科学》,杨音莱译,上海:上海译文出版社
周国平,2005,《尼采——在世纪的转折点上》,上海:上海人民出版社
周振鹤,2008,《逸言殊语》,上海:上海人民出版社
周振鹤,游如杰,2006,《中国方言与文化》,上海:上海人民出版社
陈嘉映,《维特根斯坦的哲学观》,现代哲学,2006.5
陈嘉映,《关于科学实在论的几点思考》,世界哲学,2006.6
陈嘉映,《反思哲学与汉语思维》,天涯,2004.3
陈嘉映,《从移植词看当代中国哲学》,同济大学学报(社会科学版)2005.4
代天善,李丹,《普遍语法的演变——从〈句法结构〉到“语言器官”》,2007.3
代天善,《唯理论、普遍论与进化论——乔姆斯基语言天赋论思想探源》,世界哲学,2007.5
范连义,《从生活形式到语言习得——对维特根斯坦后期哲学的一个思考》,西安外国语大学学报,2008.3
范连义,《维特根斯坦后期哲学思想中的语用蕴含》,外语学刊,2008.5
范连义,《维特根斯坦的语言生活形式观》,外语学刊,2007.2
龚放,《认知语法的特点与生成语法之比较》,外语学刊,2001.4
胡长栓,《超越真理观的认识论视界》,自然辩证法研究,2004.11
李洪儒,《试论语词层级上的说话人形象——语言哲学系列探索之一》,外语学刊,2005.5
刘小涛,《乔姆斯基的“学习理论论证”与模块假设》,哲学研究2008.10
宁春岩,《关于意义内在论》,外语教学与研究,2000.4
石定栩,《生成转换语法的理论基础》,外国语,2007.4
石毓智,《乔姆斯基“普遍语法”假说的反证——来自认知心理学的启示》,解放军外国语学院学报,2005.1
孙自辉,《维特根斯坦遵从规则说及其对外语教学的启示》,中国外语,2008.4
王刚,《语言起源的一源论》,外语教学与研究,1994.2
魏博辉,《语言·哲学·哲学语言》,北京师范大学学报(社科版),1994.1
魏在江,《认知参照点与语用预设》,外语学刊,2008.3
王广成,《从约束原则看生成语法对自然语言的共性研究——乔姆斯基的句法自立说评析》,外语学刊,2002.3
辛斌,《意义的客观论与主观论》,解放军外国语学院学报,2002.3
辛斌,《当代语言研究中的游戏观》,外语教学与研究,2003.5
章雪富,《语言游戏和生活形式的相关分析》,杭州大学学报,1996.1
邹韶华,《论语言规范的理性原则和习性原则》,社会科学战线,2005.1
邹为诚,赵飞,《论二语习得理论的建设——兼评二语习得之问题》,中国外语,2008.5
朱志方,代天善,《普遍语法的几个问题》,外语学刊,2007.4