Fundamentals of the Theory of “Language” in the Bilateral Consensus. Stalin’s Marxism and Problems of Linguistics from the Standpoint of the Communicative Model. Part II

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Andrey V. Vdovichenko
{"title":"Fundamentals of the Theory of “Language” in the Bilateral Consensus. Stalin’s Marxism and Problems of Linguistics from the Standpoint of the Communicative Model. Part II","authors":"Andrey V. Vdovichenko","doi":"10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-116-128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Joseph V. Stalin’s work Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (1950), a num­ber of general issues of the theory of the verbal process are touched upon, the in­terpretation of which is generally consistent with traditional (including modern quantitatively predominant) linguistic views on the phenomenon of “language”. The linguistic consensus is observed in several positions that arise as a result of theoretical simplification (inaccurate metaphor): 1) “language” exists as objec­tive verbal forms, constitutes a unity that ensures communication between peo­ple and which can be an object of study and description; 2) “language” is gram­mar and vocabulary; 3) “language” is connected with thinking; there are no thoughts without “language”; 4) “language” is a common property for a given collective (nation, people), “language” unites all those who speak it; 5) “lan­guage” is a mystical (“magic”) object. This article proposes a critique of the Marxist-linguistic consensus from the point of view of the communicative model. A simplified (linguistic) model of a word-containing semiotic process is the result of excessive attention to the verbal substrate (“words”), of an attempt to present verbal units as self-organized semantic-formal modules responsible for everything that happens in the field of communicative meaning (sense) for­mation. As a result, a theoretical construct “language” is created, designed to save researchers’ a priori attitude to the matter of words (which, at the right mo­ment, when confronting with reality, is casuistically replaced by “speech”, which, however, is also verbal). The inefficiency of “language” (and “speech”) lies in the imposition of its own action on verbal “bodies”, while the generation of meaning in natural word-containing communication is entirely carried out by the complex personal impact of the semiotic actor.","PeriodicalId":46795,"journal":{"name":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"VOPROSY FILOSOFII","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2023-8-116-128","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Joseph V. Stalin’s work Marxism and Problems of Linguistics (1950), a num­ber of general issues of the theory of the verbal process are touched upon, the in­terpretation of which is generally consistent with traditional (including modern quantitatively predominant) linguistic views on the phenomenon of “language”. The linguistic consensus is observed in several positions that arise as a result of theoretical simplification (inaccurate metaphor): 1) “language” exists as objec­tive verbal forms, constitutes a unity that ensures communication between peo­ple and which can be an object of study and description; 2) “language” is gram­mar and vocabulary; 3) “language” is connected with thinking; there are no thoughts without “language”; 4) “language” is a common property for a given collective (nation, people), “language” unites all those who speak it; 5) “lan­guage” is a mystical (“magic”) object. This article proposes a critique of the Marxist-linguistic consensus from the point of view of the communicative model. A simplified (linguistic) model of a word-containing semiotic process is the result of excessive attention to the verbal substrate (“words”), of an attempt to present verbal units as self-organized semantic-formal modules responsible for everything that happens in the field of communicative meaning (sense) for­mation. As a result, a theoretical construct “language” is created, designed to save researchers’ a priori attitude to the matter of words (which, at the right mo­ment, when confronting with reality, is casuistically replaced by “speech”, which, however, is also verbal). The inefficiency of “language” (and “speech”) lies in the imposition of its own action on verbal “bodies”, while the generation of meaning in natural word-containing communication is entirely carried out by the complex personal impact of the semiotic actor.
双边共识中“语言”理论的基础。从交际模式看斯大林的马克思主义与语言学问题。第二部分
在约瑟夫·v·斯大林的著作《马克思主义与语言学问题》(1950)中,涉及了语言过程理论的一些一般问题,其解释与传统(包括现代数量占主导地位的)语言学对“语言”现象的观点大体一致。由于理论简化(不准确的隐喻)而产生的几种立场可以观察到语言共识:1)“语言”作为客观的口头形式存在,构成了确保人与人之间交流的统一,并且可以成为研究和描述的对象;2)“语言”是语法和词汇;3)“语言”与思维联系在一起;没有“语言”就没有思想;4)“语言”是一个特定集体(国家、人民)的共同财产,“语言”将所有说这种语言的人团结在一起;“语言”是一种神秘的(“神奇的”)对象。本文从交际模式的角度对马克思主义-语言学共识进行了批判。一个包含词的符号过程的简化(语言学)模型是过度关注言语基底(“词”)的结果,是试图将言语单位呈现为负责交际意义(意义)形成领域中发生的一切的自组织语义-形式模块的结果。因此,一个理论结构“语言”被创造出来,旨在拯救研究者对词语问题的先验态度(在适当的时候,当面对现实时,这种态度被诡辩地用“言语”取代,然而,言语也是言语的)。“语言”(以及“言语”)的低效在于它将自身的行为强加于言语“身体”上,而自然含词交际中意义的生成完全是由符号学行动者复杂的个人影响来完成的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
VOPROSY FILOSOFII
VOPROSY FILOSOFII PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
100
期刊介绍: "Вопросы философии" - академическое научное издание, центральный философский журнал в России. В настоящее время является органом Президиума Российской Академии Наук. Журнал "Вопросы философии" исторически тесно связан с Институтом философии РАН. Выходит ежемесячно. Журнал был основан в июле 1947 г. Интернет-версия журнала запущена в мае 2009 года.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信