当代外语研究

当代外语研究 >

2019 , Vol. 19 >Issue 05: 50 - 62

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2019.05.007

语言哲学

字面意义与“所言”的联系与甄别——一项基于语义直觉判断的实证研究

展开
  • 上海交通大学,上海,200240
刘龙根,上海交通大学外国语学院教授、博士生导师。主要研究方向为语言学与应用语言学、语言哲学。电子邮箱:wyzxzr@sjtu.edu.cn。

网络出版日期: 2019-10-25

基金资助

*本文系国家社科基金项目“雷卡纳蒂语言哲学思想研究”(编号 16BZX071)阶段性研究成果;本论文得到中国国家留学基金(编号 201706230155)的资助。

收起

An Empirical Study on Chinese Advanced EFL Learners' Semantic Intuition about the Relationship of Literal Meaning with “What-Is-Said”

Expand

Online published: 2019-10-25

Fold

摘要

字面意义与“所言”的本体论表征与心理现实性历来是学界争论的焦点。以往的争鸣大多囿于理论思辨,缺乏实验数据的支撑。受语言哲学实验转向的启迪,本研究采用问卷调查与个别访谈相结合的方法,系统探究了180名中国高级英语学者关于字面意义与“所言”的直觉判断。数据表明,受试能够区分字面意义与所言,更倾向于将经过语用充实的意义判断为话语所言。受试的直觉判断还受制于语用充实成分的规约化程度:规约化程度越高,受试越可能将其判定为话语的字面意义。

关键词： 字面意义; 所言; 语义直觉; 实证研究

本文引用格式

刘龙根, 朱晓真, 霍文静 . 字面意义与“所言”的联系与甄别——一项基于语义直觉判断的实证研究[J]. 当代外语研究, 2019 , 19(05) : 50 -62 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2019.05.007

参考文献

Bach, K. 1994. Conversational impliciture [J]. Mind and Language (9): 124-162.
Baptista, L. 2014. Saying what? On Grice on what is said [J]. European Journal of Philosophy 22(1): 1-19.
Borg, E. 2012. Pursuing Meaning [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cappelen, H. & E. Lepore. 2005. Insensitive Semantics: A Defense of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Act Pluralism [M]. Blackwell.
Carston, R. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication [M]. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Coulson, S. & T. Oakley. 2005. Blending and coded meaning: Literal and figurative meaning in cognitive semantic [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 37(10): 1510-1536.
Dascal, M. 1987. Defending literal meaning [J]. Cognitive Science 11: 258-281.
Doran, R., G. Ward, M. Larson & Y. McNabb. 2012. A novel experimental paradigm for distinguishing between what is said and what is implicated [J]. Language 88 (1):124-154.
Gibbs, R. & J. Moise. 1997. Pragmatics in understanding what is said [J]. Cognition 62: 51-74.
Grice, H. P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words [M]. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Jaszczolt, K. M. 2012. Semantics/pragmatics boundary disputes [A].In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger & P. Portner(eds.). Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. Vol. 3 [C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 2333-2360.
Jaszczolt, K. M. 2016. Meaning in Linguistic Interaction: Semantics, Metasemantics, Philosophy of Language [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lepore, E. & M. Stone. 2015. Imagination and Convention: Distinguishing Grammar and Inference in Language [M]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Levinson, S. 1983. Pragmatics [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, S. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature [M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Récanati, F. 2004. Literal Meaning [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Récanati, F. 2017. Contextualism and polysemy[J].Dialectica 71(3):379-397.
Searle, J. 1978. Literal meaning [J].Erkenntnis 13:207-224.
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson. 2012. Meaning and Relevance [M]. London: Cambridge University Press.
Sternau, M., M. Ariel, R. Giora & O. Fein. 2015. Levels of interpretation: New tools for characterizing intended meanings [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 84: 86-101.
Thau, M. 2002. Consciousness and Cognition [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉