符号学与语言哲学的意义协商——从赵义恒的符号学视角看

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Semiotica Pub Date : 2022-11-01 DOI:10.1515/sem-2021-0125
Zhi Yang
{"title":"符号学与语言哲学的意义协商——从赵义恒的符号学视角看","authors":"Zhi Yang","doi":"10.1515/sem-2021-0125","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Western language philosophy studies meaning from diverse aspects, with a core concern for how meaning is formulated and interpreted. The artificial-language and natural-language schools are two camps in this philosophical undertaking, the former insisting on scientific logic and positivism in meaning verification while the latter emphasizing subjective intention and context in meaning interpretation. Semiotics provides another semantic perspective that tips toward the theory of the natural-language school. This article compares the semantic thought of analytical language philosophers with that of a Chinese semiotician – Yiheng Zhao, who defines meaning as the interpretative potential between any two signs, and, being the product of signifying activities, meaning should be stipulated as dynamic process instead of a static essence. Thus, the interpretation of meaning is totally free of the shackles of logical positivism and radical interpretation required by the artificial-language school. On the other hand, differing from the natural-language school, meaning in Zhao’s semiotic theory can be either expressive or communicative, which means meaning that has originated from an expresser does not necessarily need an interpreter like the utterer-audience binary in Grice’s theory. Compared with Anglo-American analytical language philosophers, Zhao shows more affinities in semantic thought with the continental philosophers – Husserl, Heidegger, Gadamer, Habermas, and Ricoeur.","PeriodicalId":47288,"journal":{"name":"Semiotica","volume":"130 1","pages":"249 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Negotiations on meaning between semiotics and language philosophy: from Yiheng Zhao’s semiotic perspectives\",\"authors\":\"Zhi Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/sem-2021-0125\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Western language philosophy studies meaning from diverse aspects, with a core concern for how meaning is formulated and interpreted. The artificial-language and natural-language schools are two camps in this philosophical undertaking, the former insisting on scientific logic and positivism in meaning verification while the latter emphasizing subjective intention and context in meaning interpretation. Semiotics provides another semantic perspective that tips toward the theory of the natural-language school. This article compares the semantic thought of analytical language philosophers with that of a Chinese semiotician – Yiheng Zhao, who defines meaning as the interpretative potential between any two signs, and, being the product of signifying activities, meaning should be stipulated as dynamic process instead of a static essence. Thus, the interpretation of meaning is totally free of the shackles of logical positivism and radical interpretation required by the artificial-language school. On the other hand, differing from the natural-language school, meaning in Zhao’s semiotic theory can be either expressive or communicative, which means meaning that has originated from an expresser does not necessarily need an interpreter like the utterer-audience binary in Grice’s theory. Compared with Anglo-American analytical language philosophers, Zhao shows more affinities in semantic thought with the continental philosophers – Husserl, Heidegger, Gadamer, Habermas, and Ricoeur.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47288,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Semiotica\",\"volume\":\"130 1\",\"pages\":\"249 - 273\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Semiotica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2021-0125\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Semiotica","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2021-0125","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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

西方语言哲学从多个方面研究意义,其核心关注的是意义是如何形成和解释的。人工语言学派和自然语言学派是这一哲学事业的两个阵营,前者在意义验证上坚持科学逻辑和实证主义,后者在意义解释上强调主观意图和语境。符号学提供了另一种指向自然语言学派理论的语义视角。本文将分析语言哲学家的语义思想与中国符号学家赵义恒的语义思想进行了比较。赵义恒将意义定义为任意两个符号之间的解释潜能,并将意义作为能指活动的产物而不是静态的本质规定为动态的过程。因此,意义的解释完全摆脱了人工语言学派所要求的逻辑实证主义和激进解释的束缚。另一方面,与自然语言学派不同的是,赵的符号学理论中的意义既可以是表达的,也可以是交际的,这意味着源于表达者的意义并不一定需要像格赖斯理论中的言者-受众二元那样的解释者。与英美分析语言哲学家相比,赵在语义思想上与欧洲大陆哲学家胡塞尔、海德格尔、伽达默尔、哈贝马斯、里科尔更有相似之处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Negotiations on meaning between semiotics and language philosophy: from Yiheng Zhao’s semiotic perspectives
Abstract Western language philosophy studies meaning from diverse aspects, with a core concern for how meaning is formulated and interpreted. The artificial-language and natural-language schools are two camps in this philosophical undertaking, the former insisting on scientific logic and positivism in meaning verification while the latter emphasizing subjective intention and context in meaning interpretation. Semiotics provides another semantic perspective that tips toward the theory of the natural-language school. This article compares the semantic thought of analytical language philosophers with that of a Chinese semiotician – Yiheng Zhao, who defines meaning as the interpretative potential between any two signs, and, being the product of signifying activities, meaning should be stipulated as dynamic process instead of a static essence. Thus, the interpretation of meaning is totally free of the shackles of logical positivism and radical interpretation required by the artificial-language school. On the other hand, differing from the natural-language school, meaning in Zhao’s semiotic theory can be either expressive or communicative, which means meaning that has originated from an expresser does not necessarily need an interpreter like the utterer-audience binary in Grice’s theory. Compared with Anglo-American analytical language philosophers, Zhao shows more affinities in semantic thought with the continental philosophers – Husserl, Heidegger, Gadamer, Habermas, and Ricoeur.
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
Semiotica
Semiotica Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
37.50%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Semiotica, the Journal of the International Association for Semiotic Studies, founded in 1969, appears in five volumes of four issues per year, in two languages (English and French), and occasionally in German. Semiotica features articles reporting results of research in all branches of semiotic studies, in-depth reviews of selected current literature in this field, and occasional guest editorials and reports. From time to time, Special Issues, devoted to topics of particular interest, are assembled by Guest Editors. The publishers of Semiotica offer an annual prize, the Mouton d"Or, to the author of the best article each year. The article is selected by an independent international jury.
×
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