当代外语研究

当代外语研究 >

2023 , Vol. 23 >Issue 2: 135 - 143

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.02.013

语言学与应用语言学

可能世界语义学的体认整合解读

展开
  • 四川外国语大学,重庆,400031
王天翼,四川外国语大学英语学院教授。主要研究方向为认知语言学、语言哲学。电子邮箱:wangsisu@163.com

网络出版日期: 2023-06-01

基金资助

*2018年国家社科基金重大招标项目“地名用字搜集整理、形音义研究与基础信息平台建设”(18ZDA294);2017年重庆市社会科学规划项目“认知语言学的本土化研究——基于EMI模型的汉语拷贝构式分析”(2017QNYY34);2021年四川外国语大学哲学社会科学研究重大招标项目“认知语言学本土化研究”的阶段性研究成果(sisuzd 202101)

收起

An Embodied-Cognitive Blending Interpretation to Possible World Semantics

Expand

Online published: 2023-06-01

Fold

摘要

“可能世界语义学”作为内涵语义学的核心内容,大大拓展了哲学家的视野,受到学界的普遍关注,但克里普克并没有说明其认知成因。本文在体认语言学视野下,尝试将语言的体认观与概念整合论相结合,期望对其成因做出理论解释。概念整合论原来设计用以解释“1+1>2”的语言现象,而本文则尝试从输入空间的经验性、多域性以及融合过程的多次性三方面对其进行修补,从而解释可能世界如何形成的体认机制。

关键词： 可能世界语义学; 体认语言学; 概念整合论

本文引用格式

王天翼 . 可能世界语义学的体认整合解读[J]. 当代外语研究, 2023 , 23(2) : 135 -143 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2023.02.013

Abstract

“Possible World Semantics”, the core of Intensional Semantics, has greatly expanded the philosopher’s vision, thus drawing widespread attentions of academic field, but Kripke has not explained its cognitive origin. From the perspective of Embodied-Cognitive Linguistics, this paper tries to explain the cognitive motivation of Possible World Semantics theoretically by combining Embodied-Cognitive View of Language and Conceptual Blending Theory. Conceptual Blending Theory has been designed to explain the linguistic phenomenon of “1+1> 2”, but this paper tries to use it for interpreting the cognitive mechanism of Possible World Semantics by revising Conceptual Blending Theory from three aspects: the experientism of input spaces, the multiplicity of the input spaces and the times of blending.

Key words： Possible World Semantics; Embodied-Cognitive Linguistics; Conceptual Blending Theory

参考文献

[1] Ashby W. R. 1947. Principles of the self-organizing dynamic system[J]. Journal of General Psychology 37:125-128.
[2] Fauconnier G. 1985. Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language[M]. Cambridge,MA & London: MIT Press/Bradford.
[3] Fauconnier G. 1997. Mapping in Thought and Language[M]. Cambridge:CUP.
[4] Fauconnier G. & M. Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexitie[M]. New York: Basic Books.
[5] Kripke S. 1972. Naming and Necessity[M]. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[6] Lakoff G. & M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[7] Lakoff G. & M. Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh:The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought[M]. New York: Basic Books.
[8] Quine W. V. O. 1960. Word and Object[M]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
[9] Wittgenstein L. 1953. Philosophical Investigations (trans. by G.E.M.Anscombe)[M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
[10] 刘玉梅. 2018. 外语学科专业建设的反思与超学科前瞻[J]. 中国外语(3): 4-12.
[11] 欧清煜. 2002. 中华龙文化词典[D]. 北京: 中国文史出版社.
[12] 王天翼. 2015. 汉语拷贝构式的语用涌现研究——基于事件域双重融合模型[J]. 外语教学(6): 24-28.
[13] 王天翼、 王寅. 2015. 认知语言学对西方哲学的贡献[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版)(4): 52-62.
[14] 王寅. 2014. 语义理论与语言教学[M]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社.
[15] 王寅. 2022a. 体认整合论的解释力和语言习得新观[J]. 外语研究(1):1-6.
[16] 王寅. 2022b. 认知语言学和体认语言学可望再度领先[J]. 当代外语研究 (2): 83-92.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉