有可能就“实用主义”一词的含义达成一致吗?

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Krzysztof Bogacki
{"title":"有可能就“实用主义”一词的含义达成一致吗?","authors":"Krzysztof Bogacki","doi":"10.31261/neo.2020.32.04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The term ‘pragmateme’ has been coined relatively recently and therefore its usage is still hesitant and its definitions lack precision. This makes it difficult to delimit the scope of all that relates to the intuition of the term. We believe that two criteria are crucial for the identification of the concept. First, it would signify an autonomous linguistic unit implying an act of enunciation, characterised by the adequacy between selecting an appropriate linguistic segment and its application, with all that it entails as constraints. This criterion derives from classical logic, based on the binary opposition of truth and falsehood. The other element of the definition of the pragmateme is difficult to apply due to its subjectivity. It can be described in terms of many-valued fuzzy logic. It requires that a privileged link be created in the consciousness of langage users between a particular formulation, conveying a given semantic content and other, competing formulations. Neither of the two criteria is correlated with formal exponents, which prevents them from being used in a database compiled for the purpose of creating a dictionary of pragmatemes","PeriodicalId":41498,"journal":{"name":"Neo-Victorian Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Est-il possible de se mettre d’accord sur le sens à donner au terme de pragmatème ?\",\"authors\":\"Krzysztof Bogacki\",\"doi\":\"10.31261/neo.2020.32.04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The term ‘pragmateme’ has been coined relatively recently and therefore its usage is still hesitant and its definitions lack precision. This makes it difficult to delimit the scope of all that relates to the intuition of the term. We believe that two criteria are crucial for the identification of the concept. First, it would signify an autonomous linguistic unit implying an act of enunciation, characterised by the adequacy between selecting an appropriate linguistic segment and its application, with all that it entails as constraints. This criterion derives from classical logic, based on the binary opposition of truth and falsehood. The other element of the definition of the pragmateme is difficult to apply due to its subjectivity. It can be described in terms of many-valued fuzzy logic. It requires that a privileged link be created in the consciousness of langage users between a particular formulation, conveying a given semantic content and other, competing formulations. Neither of the two criteria is correlated with formal exponents, which prevents them from being used in a database compiled for the purpose of creating a dictionary of pragmatemes\",\"PeriodicalId\":41498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neo-Victorian Studies\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neo-Victorian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31261/neo.2020.32.04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neo-Victorian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31261/neo.2020.32.04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“pragmateme”这个词是最近才被创造出来的,因此它的使用仍然犹豫不决,它的定义也缺乏准确性。这使得划定与术语直觉相关的所有范围变得困难。我们认为,两个标准对于确定这一概念是至关重要的。首先,它将意味着一种自主的语言单位,意味着一种发音行为,其特征是在选择适当的语言片段和应用之间的充分性,以及它所带来的所有限制。这一标准源自经典逻辑,基于真与假的二元对立。语用主位定义的另一个要素由于其主观性而难以适用。它可以用多值模糊逻辑来描述。它要求在语言使用者的意识中,在传递给定语义内容的特定表述和其他竞争性表述之间建立一种特权联系。这两个标准都不与形式指数相关,因此无法在为创建实用参数字典而编译的数据库中使用它们
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Est-il possible de se mettre d’accord sur le sens à donner au terme de pragmatème ?
The term ‘pragmateme’ has been coined relatively recently and therefore its usage is still hesitant and its definitions lack precision. This makes it difficult to delimit the scope of all that relates to the intuition of the term. We believe that two criteria are crucial for the identification of the concept. First, it would signify an autonomous linguistic unit implying an act of enunciation, characterised by the adequacy between selecting an appropriate linguistic segment and its application, with all that it entails as constraints. This criterion derives from classical logic, based on the binary opposition of truth and falsehood. The other element of the definition of the pragmateme is difficult to apply due to its subjectivity. It can be described in terms of many-valued fuzzy logic. It requires that a privileged link be created in the consciousness of langage users between a particular formulation, conveying a given semantic content and other, competing formulations. Neither of the two criteria is correlated with formal exponents, which prevents them from being used in a database compiled for the purpose of creating a dictionary of pragmatemes
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neo-Victorian Studies
Neo-Victorian Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
52 weeks
×
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