{"title":"语言学家和他们的工作:认知和伦理挑战","authors":"Marek Kuźniak","doi":"10.1016/j.endeavour.2020.100732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper aims to show how the specific ethics of scientific undertaking tightly underlies epistemic reflection upon the nature of linguistic work and its outcome. The relationship between linguistics and ethics seems evident at the level of the narrative, i.e. the language in which the basic linguistic findings are established. The article is intended as an introduction to an interplay of linguistics, epistemology and the ethics of linguistic work. The departure point for the argument is the CONTAINER perception of language by linguists, which produces the well-established distinction between internalist and externalist positions. The paper, however, invites the reader to reconsider the tension between internalists and externalists and instead argues for a more general opposition, i.e. between the non-transcendental naturalists (naturalists) and transcendental naturalists (extra-naturalists). The polarity is seen as underpinning the present-day debates, while concurrently transversing the traditionally recognised dichotomies. The distinction promises to be productive both at the level of substantive assessment of linguistic research and at the level of epistemic qualification of the outcome of a linguistic study. Sharp and uncompromising as the naturalist vs extra-naturalist dichotomy seems to hold, the paper offers ways to bridge the gap between the apparently exclusive philosophies. The proposed solution, while seemingly only aesthetic, ultimately touches an ethical dimension as it centres on the appropriate construction of the narrative of linguistic fact-finding, which promotes approximative rather than definitive statements in the scholarly discourse. The desired effect is an ethical consensus underlying the work of a linguist.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51032,"journal":{"name":"Endeavour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.endeavour.2020.100732","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linguists and their work: Epistemic and ethical challenges\",\"authors\":\"Marek Kuźniak\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.endeavour.2020.100732\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper aims to show how the specific ethics of scientific undertaking tightly underlies epistemic reflection upon the nature of linguistic work and its outcome. The relationship between linguistics and ethics seems evident at the level of the narrative, i.e. the language in which the basic linguistic findings are established. The article is intended as an introduction to an interplay of linguistics, epistemology and the ethics of linguistic work. The departure point for the argument is the CONTAINER perception of language by linguists, which produces the well-established distinction between internalist and externalist positions. The paper, however, invites the reader to reconsider the tension between internalists and externalists and instead argues for a more general opposition, i.e. between the non-transcendental naturalists (naturalists) and transcendental naturalists (extra-naturalists). The polarity is seen as underpinning the present-day debates, while concurrently transversing the traditionally recognised dichotomies. The distinction promises to be productive both at the level of substantive assessment of linguistic research and at the level of epistemic qualification of the outcome of a linguistic study. Sharp and uncompromising as the naturalist vs extra-naturalist dichotomy seems to hold, the paper offers ways to bridge the gap between the apparently exclusive philosophies. The proposed solution, while seemingly only aesthetic, ultimately touches an ethical dimension as it centres on the appropriate construction of the narrative of linguistic fact-finding, which promotes approximative rather than definitive statements in the scholarly discourse. The desired effect is an ethical consensus underlying the work of a linguist.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51032,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endeavour\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.endeavour.2020.100732\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endeavour\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160932720300491\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endeavour","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160932720300491","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Linguists and their work: Epistemic and ethical challenges
This paper aims to show how the specific ethics of scientific undertaking tightly underlies epistemic reflection upon the nature of linguistic work and its outcome. The relationship between linguistics and ethics seems evident at the level of the narrative, i.e. the language in which the basic linguistic findings are established. The article is intended as an introduction to an interplay of linguistics, epistemology and the ethics of linguistic work. The departure point for the argument is the CONTAINER perception of language by linguists, which produces the well-established distinction between internalist and externalist positions. The paper, however, invites the reader to reconsider the tension between internalists and externalists and instead argues for a more general opposition, i.e. between the non-transcendental naturalists (naturalists) and transcendental naturalists (extra-naturalists). The polarity is seen as underpinning the present-day debates, while concurrently transversing the traditionally recognised dichotomies. The distinction promises to be productive both at the level of substantive assessment of linguistic research and at the level of epistemic qualification of the outcome of a linguistic study. Sharp and uncompromising as the naturalist vs extra-naturalist dichotomy seems to hold, the paper offers ways to bridge the gap between the apparently exclusive philosophies. The proposed solution, while seemingly only aesthetic, ultimately touches an ethical dimension as it centres on the appropriate construction of the narrative of linguistic fact-finding, which promotes approximative rather than definitive statements in the scholarly discourse. The desired effect is an ethical consensus underlying the work of a linguist.
期刊介绍:
Endeavour, established in 1942, has, over its long and proud history, developed into one of the leading journals in the history and philosophy of science. Endeavour publishes high-quality articles on a wide array of scientific topics from ancient to modern, across all disciplines. It serves as a critical forum for the interdisciplinary exploration and evaluation of natural knowledge and its development throughout history. Each issue contains lavish color and black-and-white illustrations. This makes Endeavour an ideal destination for history and philosophy of science articles with a strong visual component.
Endeavour presents the history and philosophy of science in a clear and accessible manner, ensuring the journal is a valuable tool for historians, philosophers, practicing scientists, and general readers. To enable it to have the broadest coverage possible, Endeavour features four types of articles:
-Research articles are concise, fully referenced, and beautifully illustrated with high quality reproductions of the most important source material.
-In Vivo articles will illustrate the rich and numerous connections between historical and philosophical scholarship and matters of current public interest, and provide rich, readable explanations of important current events from historical and philosophical perspectives.
-Book Reviews and Commentaries provide a picture of the rapidly growing history of science discipline. Written by both established and emerging scholars, our reviews provide a vibrant overview of the latest publications and media in the history and philosophy of science.
-Lost and Found Pieces are playful and creative short essays which focus on objects, theories, tools, and methods that have been significant to science but underappreciated by collective memory.