互动中的心智:走向广义认知观
|
摘要
认知语言学一向将研究重心放在心理结构上,这在无形中形成了个体认知的取向,对语言的社会使用维度则有所忽视。究其根本,这源自对认知及概念化的狭隘解读。有鉴于此,本文主张扩充认知与概念化的内涵。我们拓宽了概念化主体与概念化对象的范围,明确了概念化的目的导向性。呼应当前认知语言学对语言社会性的回归,本文主张从体验认知拓展至互动式体验认知。最后,本文主张,语言的完整认知表征体现为心智寓于互动之中。这一点不仅作为一个主张是可行的,而且在小句结构中有明晰的体现,我们采用来自主观性领域的证据说明了这一点。
It is traditional in Cognitive Linguistics to put the focus of study on mental structures,which has unwittingly led to an individual orientation to cognition,with little attention to the social usage dimension of language. Fundamentally,this is attributed to a narrow reading of cognition and conceptualization. In the light of this situation,we propose to extend the import of cognition and conceptualization,by extending the scope of the subject and object of conceptualization,and specifying its goal-orientation. Echoing current return to the social nature of language in Cognitive Linguistics,we propose that the notion of embodied cognition be extended to interactive embodied cognition. It is argued that a full cognitive representation of language finds realization in the immanency of mind in interaction,which is not only tenable as a proposal,but also finds expression in the clausal structure. We come up with evidence from subjectivity in support of it.
It is traditional in Cognitive Linguistics to put the focus of study on mental structures,which has unwittingly led to an individual orientation to cognition,with little attention to the social usage dimension of language. Fundamentally,this is attributed to a narrow reading of cognition and conceptualization. In the light of this situation,we propose to extend the import of cognition and conceptualization,by extending the scope of the subject and object of conceptualization,and specifying its goal-orientation. Echoing current return to the social nature of language in Cognitive Linguistics,we propose that the notion of embodied cognition be extended to interactive embodied cognition. It is argued that a full cognitive representation of language finds realization in the immanency of mind in interaction,which is not only tenable as a proposal,but also finds expression in the clausal structure. We come up with evidence from subjectivity in support of it.
引文
Bakhtin,M.M.1981[1930s].The Dialogic Imagination:Four Essays[M].Holquist,M.,Emerson,C.&M.Holquist(trans.).Austin and London:University of Texas Press.
Barlow,Michael&Suzanne Kemmer.2000.Usage-Based Models of Language[M].Stanford,CA:CSLI Publications.
Croft,W.A.2009.Toward a Sociocognitive Linguistics[G]∥V.Evans&S.Pourcel.New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics.Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,395-420.
Durkheim,.1996[1893].Methodology in Sociology[M].London:Allen&Unwin.
Evans,V.&M.Green.2006.Cognitive Linguistics:An Introduction[M].Edinburgh,UK:Edinburgh University Press.
Geeraerts,D.2016.The sociosemiotic commitment[J].Cognitive Linguistics(4):527-542.
Geeraerts,D.and H.Cuyckens.2007.Introducing Cognitive Linguistics[G]∥Geeraerts,D.&H.Cyuyckens.The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.Oxford:Oxford U-niversity Press,3-21.
Geeraerts,D.,G.Kristiansen&Y.Peirsman.2010.Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics[M].Berlin:Mouton De Gruyter.
Goldberg,Adele E.1995.Constructions:A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg,Adele E.2006.Constructions at Work:The Nature of Generalization in Language[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Harder,Peter.2010.Meaning in Mind and Society.A Functional Contribution to the Social Turn in Cognitive Linguistics[M].Berlin&New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Igakemi,Yo.2005.Indices of a‘Subjectivity-prominent’Language.Between Cognitive Linguistics and Linguistictypology[J].Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics(1):32-64.
Kristiansen,G.&R.Dirven.2008.Cognitive Sociolinguistics:Language Variation,Cultural Models,Social Systems[G].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov,William.1972.Sociolinguistic Patterns[M].Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
Labov,William.2010.Principles of Linguistic Change.Vol.3:Cognitive and Cultural Factors[M].Oxford:Blackwell.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson.1980.Metaphors We Live By[M].Chicago and London:University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson.1999.Philosophy in the Flesh:The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought[M].New York:Basic Books.
Langacker,R.W.1987.Foundations of Cognitive Grammar.Vol.I:Theoretical Prerequisites[M].Stanford:Stanford U-niversity Press.
Langacker,R.W.1990.Concept,Image,and Symbol:The Cognitive Basis of Grammar[M].Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker,R.W.1999.Grammar and Conceptualization[M].Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker,R.W.2008.Cognitive Grammar:A Basic Introduction[M].New York:Oxford University Press.
Leech,J.1983.Principles of Pragmatics[M].London and New York:Longman.
Marín-Arrese,J.2007.Dirk Geeraerts:Cognitive sociolinguistics and the sociology of Cognitive Linguistics[J].Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics(5):289-305.
Sinha,C.2009.Language as a Biocultural Niche and Social in-stitution[G]∥V.Evans&S.Pourcel.New Directions inCognitive Linguistics.Amsterdam:John Benjamins,289-309.
Talmy,L.2000.Toward a Cognitive Semantics.Vol.I.[M].Cambridge,MA:MIT Press/Bradford.
Vygotsky,Lev.1986.Thought and Language[M].Alex Kozulin.Cambridge,Ma.:Harvard University Press.
Weinreich,U,W.1968.Labov and M.Herzog.Empirical Foundations for a Theory of Language Change[C]∥W.Lehmann&Y.Malkiel.Directions for Historical Linguistics.Austin:University of Texas Press,97-195.
苏晓军.2009.认知语言学的社会转向[J].外国语(5):47-51.
索绪尔.1999[1916].普通语言学教程[M].高名凯,译.北京:商务印书馆.
王天翼,王寅.2012.认知社会语言学[J].中国外语(2):44-53.
赵永峰.2015.后现代哲学思潮中的认知社会语言学研究[J].外语学刊(4):65-70.
(1)这一点主要归咎于对乔姆斯基的心智观的继承。通过将语言知识限定在个体头脑中天赋的语言习得机制,乔姆斯基创立了一种个体意义上的认知观。认知语言学在反对乔姆斯基语言学的同时继承了其心智主义立场,因而未能避免其心智观的局限性。
(1)作为认知语言学与社会语言学结合的产物,认知社会语言学致力于在认知框架下解释社会语境中的语言变异问题。
(1)近年来,认知语言学开始认识到语言的双重功能:符号功能与交互功能(Evans et al.,2006;Igakemi,2005;Langacker,2008),但在实际研究中往往有厚此薄彼之嫌。
(1)也有学者兼作广义与狭义解读,如Lyons将其定义为“自然语言在其结构及常规运作方式中,为言语主体提供了表达自我及其态度、信念的手段”(Lyons,1982:102),前者涉及语言运用中的主观性,后者涉及语言结构中的主观性。考虑到这里关注的是主观性在语言结构中的投射,我们仅取狭义理解。
(2)当然,小句结构的具体组织情况还与一种语言的基本语序有关。在SOV型语言(如日语)中,交互成分聚集在句尾部分,呈右重心。不过这一点与辖域问题并不矛盾,依然是呈现辖域层层包含之势:(1)[[[命题内容]主观性成分]-交互成分][[[えががはじまる]か]ね][[[电影SUB开始]思量]询问]
(3)当然,这里讨论的是可能而非必然情况。
Barlow,Michael&Suzanne Kemmer.2000.Usage-Based Models of Language[M].Stanford,CA:CSLI Publications.
Croft,W.A.2009.Toward a Sociocognitive Linguistics[G]∥V.Evans&S.Pourcel.New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics.Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins,395-420.
Durkheim,.1996[1893].Methodology in Sociology[M].London:Allen&Unwin.
Evans,V.&M.Green.2006.Cognitive Linguistics:An Introduction[M].Edinburgh,UK:Edinburgh University Press.
Geeraerts,D.2016.The sociosemiotic commitment[J].Cognitive Linguistics(4):527-542.
Geeraerts,D.and H.Cuyckens.2007.Introducing Cognitive Linguistics[G]∥Geeraerts,D.&H.Cyuyckens.The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics.Oxford:Oxford U-niversity Press,3-21.
Geeraerts,D.,G.Kristiansen&Y.Peirsman.2010.Advances in Cognitive Sociolinguistics[M].Berlin:Mouton De Gruyter.
Goldberg,Adele E.1995.Constructions:A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg,Adele E.2006.Constructions at Work:The Nature of Generalization in Language[M].Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Harder,Peter.2010.Meaning in Mind and Society.A Functional Contribution to the Social Turn in Cognitive Linguistics[M].Berlin&New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Igakemi,Yo.2005.Indices of a‘Subjectivity-prominent’Language.Between Cognitive Linguistics and Linguistictypology[J].Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics(1):32-64.
Kristiansen,G.&R.Dirven.2008.Cognitive Sociolinguistics:Language Variation,Cultural Models,Social Systems[G].Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter.
Labov,William.1972.Sociolinguistic Patterns[M].Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
Labov,William.2010.Principles of Linguistic Change.Vol.3:Cognitive and Cultural Factors[M].Oxford:Blackwell.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson.1980.Metaphors We Live By[M].Chicago and London:University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff,G.&M.Johnson.1999.Philosophy in the Flesh:The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought[M].New York:Basic Books.
Langacker,R.W.1987.Foundations of Cognitive Grammar.Vol.I:Theoretical Prerequisites[M].Stanford:Stanford U-niversity Press.
Langacker,R.W.1990.Concept,Image,and Symbol:The Cognitive Basis of Grammar[M].Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker,R.W.1999.Grammar and Conceptualization[M].Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker,R.W.2008.Cognitive Grammar:A Basic Introduction[M].New York:Oxford University Press.
Leech,J.1983.Principles of Pragmatics[M].London and New York:Longman.
Marín-Arrese,J.2007.Dirk Geeraerts:Cognitive sociolinguistics and the sociology of Cognitive Linguistics[J].Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics(5):289-305.
Sinha,C.2009.Language as a Biocultural Niche and Social in-stitution[G]∥V.Evans&S.Pourcel.New Directions inCognitive Linguistics.Amsterdam:John Benjamins,289-309.
Talmy,L.2000.Toward a Cognitive Semantics.Vol.I.[M].Cambridge,MA:MIT Press/Bradford.
Vygotsky,Lev.1986.Thought and Language[M].Alex Kozulin.Cambridge,Ma.:Harvard University Press.
Weinreich,U,W.1968.Labov and M.Herzog.Empirical Foundations for a Theory of Language Change[C]∥W.Lehmann&Y.Malkiel.Directions for Historical Linguistics.Austin:University of Texas Press,97-195.
苏晓军.2009.认知语言学的社会转向[J].外国语(5):47-51.
索绪尔.1999[1916].普通语言学教程[M].高名凯,译.北京:商务印书馆.
王天翼,王寅.2012.认知社会语言学[J].中国外语(2):44-53.
赵永峰.2015.后现代哲学思潮中的认知社会语言学研究[J].外语学刊(4):65-70.
(1)这一点主要归咎于对乔姆斯基的心智观的继承。通过将语言知识限定在个体头脑中天赋的语言习得机制,乔姆斯基创立了一种个体意义上的认知观。认知语言学在反对乔姆斯基语言学的同时继承了其心智主义立场,因而未能避免其心智观的局限性。
(1)作为认知语言学与社会语言学结合的产物,认知社会语言学致力于在认知框架下解释社会语境中的语言变异问题。
(1)近年来,认知语言学开始认识到语言的双重功能:符号功能与交互功能(Evans et al.,2006;Igakemi,2005;Langacker,2008),但在实际研究中往往有厚此薄彼之嫌。
(1)也有学者兼作广义与狭义解读,如Lyons将其定义为“自然语言在其结构及常规运作方式中,为言语主体提供了表达自我及其态度、信念的手段”(Lyons,1982:102),前者涉及语言运用中的主观性,后者涉及语言结构中的主观性。考虑到这里关注的是主观性在语言结构中的投射,我们仅取狭义理解。
(2)当然,小句结构的具体组织情况还与一种语言的基本语序有关。在SOV型语言(如日语)中,交互成分聚集在句尾部分,呈右重心。不过这一点与辖域问题并不矛盾,依然是呈现辖域层层包含之势:(1)[[[命题内容]主观性成分]-交互成分][[[えががはじまる]か]ね][[[电影SUB开始]思量]询问]
(3)当然,这里讨论的是可能而非必然情况。