试论自然语言逻辑研究中的语法与语义
摘要
逻辑学始于分析自然语言,逻辑学的发展必然导致创立形式语言,但是活生生的自然语言,永远值得从逻辑学的角度去探索、研究其新的问题。人们运用语言有一个是否合乎逻辑的问题。思维不能脱离语言,逻辑不能脱离语言,但二者仍有区别。在思维过程中,如果概念不清、判断失误、推理有错,就会影响思维的效果,话就说不好,文章就欠通顺。逻辑可以帮助人们正确的运用语言即兴表达,获得预期的效果。就比如英语和汉语,逻辑是最能体现二者异同之处。当人们处于不同的文化之中,如何表达自己所思所想,表达出来的方式也不尽相同。不同的文化背景,造就了这种不同,但是我们思考的能力和行为、运用的方法和方式、思考的过程都是同样的。正是由于文化和思维习惯的差异,在不同的语言方面存在很大的不同,如何避免由于欠缺逻辑分析而造成词不达意或盲目照搬造成表意不畅、歧义,是今后逻辑语义步研究和完善的动力。本文意在分析逻辑语义与各领域学科之间的关联。探索逻辑思维在各领域的应用和发展。
Originated from the analysis of natural language, the development of logics will inevitably lead to the creation of formal language. From the point of view of logics, it is always worth to explore and study the new problems of living natural language. There is a question in using language that is whether or not it is logical. Neither thinking nor logic can be divorced from language, but there is difference between the two. During the process of thinking, with ambiguous concept, misjudgment and wrong inference, the effect of thinking will be affected; consequently, people always find their utterance fail to convey their ideas, and the sentences they make seem less flowing and fluent. However, with the help of logic, people can express themselves with language freely and achieve the expected effect. Take English and Chinese for example, the differences and similarities between the two languages become obvious when logic is taken into consideration. When people are in diverse cultures, the ways they express themselves are totally different, which can be attributed to different cultural backgrounds, despite that we have the same thinking ability, thinking methods and thinking process. Thus, the difference in language exists exactly in the differences of culture and thinking habits. It's our motivation to further and perfect the analysis of logical semantics in order to avoid the wrong expressions for lack of logical analysis or inappropriate meaning because of blind copying. This thesis aims to analyze the relations between logical semantics and various disciplines, probe the application and development of logical thinking in various fields.
Originated from the analysis of natural language, the development of logics will inevitably lead to the creation of formal language. From the point of view of logics, it is always worth to explore and study the new problems of living natural language. There is a question in using language that is whether or not it is logical. Neither thinking nor logic can be divorced from language, but there is difference between the two. During the process of thinking, with ambiguous concept, misjudgment and wrong inference, the effect of thinking will be affected; consequently, people always find their utterance fail to convey their ideas, and the sentences they make seem less flowing and fluent. However, with the help of logic, people can express themselves with language freely and achieve the expected effect. Take English and Chinese for example, the differences and similarities between the two languages become obvious when logic is taken into consideration. When people are in diverse cultures, the ways they express themselves are totally different, which can be attributed to different cultural backgrounds, despite that we have the same thinking ability, thinking methods and thinking process. Thus, the difference in language exists exactly in the differences of culture and thinking habits. It's our motivation to further and perfect the analysis of logical semantics in order to avoid the wrong expressions for lack of logical analysis or inappropriate meaning because of blind copying. This thesis aims to analyze the relations between logical semantics and various disciplines, probe the application and development of logical thinking in various fields.
引文
①许慎(约58-约147),字叔重,是东汉著名经学家、文字学家(有“字圣”之称)、语言学家,中国文字学的开拓者。
②迪奥尼西奥斯,公元前1世纪罗马统治时期的希腊哲学家、历史家、修辞学家、文艺评论家。
①瑞士语言学家费尔迪南·德·索绪尔(Ferdinand de saussure 1857一1913)足现代语言学的重要奠基者,也是结构主义的开创者之一。他被后人称为现代语言学之父,结构主义的鼻祖。
① Russell,"Responses",in The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell,ed.by P.A.Schilpp,1944.p.694.
② Russell,"Logical Atomism",in Logic and Knowledge,1955,p.331.
① Gadamer, Truth and Method,1979,p.404
①参见克里普克1980(1972)或范·本特姆(Van Benthem) 1988
②斯塔尔纳克(Stalnaker) 1984
①巴威思(Barwise)和库珀(Cooper) 1981
②蒙太古1974a
③加林(Gallin) 1975
①吉奇(Geach) 1962
[1]方力.逻辑语义学.北京,北京语言文化大学出版社,2000,08-24.
[2]杨士毅.逻辑与人生.哈尔滨,黑龙江教育出版社,1989,43-49.
[3]逻辑与语言研究会.逻辑与语言研究.北京,中国社会科学出版社,1980,196-208.
[4]陈波.逻辑哲学导论.北京,中国人民大学出版社,2000,13-15.
[5]许国璋.论语言和语言学.北京,商务印书馆,1997,265-267.
[6]涂继亮.英美语言哲学概论.武汉,武汉大学出版社,2007,85-90.
[7]冯志伟.机器翻译研究.北京,中国对外翻译出版公司,2004,89-91.
[8]罗·格勃尔(Lou Goble).哲学逻辑.北京,中国人民大学出版社,2008,527-530.
[9]王力钢.从逻辑观的演变看逻辑语义学的发展.重庆理工大学学报(社会科学),2010,06,48-50.
[10]邹崇理.自然语言和逻辑语言：现代逻辑的延伸.绵阳师范学院学报,2007,03,01-06.
[11]隋然.自然语言与逻辑语言：人脑与电脑.首都师范大学学报(社会科学版),2006,S3,29-33.
[12]李振中.“逻辑语义”——复句类型划分的原则依据.喀什师范学院学报(社会科学版),2001,04,59-62.
[13]许晓艳,黄滨.从翻译失误看语篇翻译中的深层逻辑语义分析.长江大学学报(社会科学版),2006,05,89-91.
[14]张丽丽,郭梦秋.英汉语篇深层逻辑语义对比分析.阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2009,06,44-46.
[15]涂继亮.弗雷格其对分析哲学的影.哲学研究,1983,11,12-13.
[16]涂继亮.关于语言和逻辑——读金岳霖先生的《批判唯心哲学关于逻辑与语言的思想》有感.金岳霖学术思想研究——金岳霖学术思想研讨会论文集,1985,12,35-36.
[17]张金兴.语义分析：从外延到内涵——卡尔纳普逻辑语义学评析.淮阴师专学报,1997,07,25.
[18]刘新文.周礼全自然语言逻辑思想综述.哲学动态,2001,07,26.
[19]梁义民,任晓明.简析罗素的摹状词理论.淮阴师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,05,25-27.
[20]王建平.逻辑学关于语境问题的研究.国内哲学动态,1986,10,28-30.
[21]刘培育.周礼全先生的学品.逻辑、语言与思维——周礼全先生八十寿辰纪念文集,2001,10,58-63.
[22]郭焰坤.古代汉语文献释义方式新探.集美大学学报(教育科学版),2011,01,28-30.
[23]朱建平.当代内涵逻辑的理论发展.苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,05,47-48.
[24]龚奎洪.《反语文学家》述评——兼评希腊怀疑论语言哲学思想.社会科学战线,2007,03,25-26.
[25]朱玉增.二论元“无”、“有”语句探讨.湖北师范学院学报,2000,08,15-17.
[26]孙英杰.组合原则的重构.学术交流,2007,03,05-09.
[27]杨媛莉.论语篇的联结手段及其应用.怀化学院学报(社会科学),2003,12,31-33.
[28]唐品芳.逻辑语义结构视阈下的英汉语篇对比研究.内蒙古农业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,12,15-17.
[29]温亚东.英汉语篇逻辑语义结构及应用.考试周刊,2009,06,18-19.
②迪奥尼西奥斯,公元前1世纪罗马统治时期的希腊哲学家、历史家、修辞学家、文艺评论家。
①瑞士语言学家费尔迪南·德·索绪尔(Ferdinand de saussure 1857一1913)足现代语言学的重要奠基者,也是结构主义的开创者之一。他被后人称为现代语言学之父,结构主义的鼻祖。
① Russell,"Responses",in The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell,ed.by P.A.Schilpp,1944.p.694.
② Russell,"Logical Atomism",in Logic and Knowledge,1955,p.331.
① Gadamer, Truth and Method,1979,p.404
①参见克里普克1980(1972)或范·本特姆(Van Benthem) 1988
②斯塔尔纳克(Stalnaker) 1984
①巴威思(Barwise)和库珀(Cooper) 1981
②蒙太古1974a
③加林(Gallin) 1975
①吉奇(Geach) 1962
[1]方力.逻辑语义学.北京,北京语言文化大学出版社,2000,08-24.
[2]杨士毅.逻辑与人生.哈尔滨,黑龙江教育出版社,1989,43-49.
[3]逻辑与语言研究会.逻辑与语言研究.北京,中国社会科学出版社,1980,196-208.
[4]陈波.逻辑哲学导论.北京,中国人民大学出版社,2000,13-15.
[5]许国璋.论语言和语言学.北京,商务印书馆,1997,265-267.
[6]涂继亮.英美语言哲学概论.武汉,武汉大学出版社,2007,85-90.
[7]冯志伟.机器翻译研究.北京,中国对外翻译出版公司,2004,89-91.
[8]罗·格勃尔(Lou Goble).哲学逻辑.北京,中国人民大学出版社,2008,527-530.
[9]王力钢.从逻辑观的演变看逻辑语义学的发展.重庆理工大学学报(社会科学),2010,06,48-50.
[10]邹崇理.自然语言和逻辑语言：现代逻辑的延伸.绵阳师范学院学报,2007,03,01-06.
[11]隋然.自然语言与逻辑语言：人脑与电脑.首都师范大学学报(社会科学版),2006,S3,29-33.
[12]李振中.“逻辑语义”——复句类型划分的原则依据.喀什师范学院学报(社会科学版),2001,04,59-62.
[13]许晓艳,黄滨.从翻译失误看语篇翻译中的深层逻辑语义分析.长江大学学报(社会科学版),2006,05,89-91.
[14]张丽丽,郭梦秋.英汉语篇深层逻辑语义对比分析.阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版),2009,06,44-46.
[15]涂继亮.弗雷格其对分析哲学的影.哲学研究,1983,11,12-13.
[16]涂继亮.关于语言和逻辑——读金岳霖先生的《批判唯心哲学关于逻辑与语言的思想》有感.金岳霖学术思想研究——金岳霖学术思想研讨会论文集,1985,12,35-36.
[17]张金兴.语义分析：从外延到内涵——卡尔纳普逻辑语义学评析.淮阴师专学报,1997,07,25.
[18]刘新文.周礼全自然语言逻辑思想综述.哲学动态,2001,07,26.
[19]梁义民,任晓明.简析罗素的摹状词理论.淮阴师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,05,25-27.
[20]王建平.逻辑学关于语境问题的研究.国内哲学动态,1986,10,28-30.
[21]刘培育.周礼全先生的学品.逻辑、语言与思维——周礼全先生八十寿辰纪念文集,2001,10,58-63.
[22]郭焰坤.古代汉语文献释义方式新探.集美大学学报(教育科学版),2011,01,28-30.
[23]朱建平.当代内涵逻辑的理论发展.苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2010,05,47-48.
[24]龚奎洪.《反语文学家》述评——兼评希腊怀疑论语言哲学思想.社会科学战线,2007,03,25-26.
[25]朱玉增.二论元“无”、“有”语句探讨.湖北师范学院学报,2000,08,15-17.
[26]孙英杰.组合原则的重构.学术交流,2007,03,05-09.
[27]杨媛莉.论语篇的联结手段及其应用.怀化学院学报(社会科学),2003,12,31-33.
[28]唐品芳.逻辑语义结构视阈下的英汉语篇对比研究.内蒙古农业大学学报(社会科学版),2008,12,15-17.
[29]温亚东.英汉语篇逻辑语义结构及应用.考试周刊,2009,06,18-19.