Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies >
The Bottleneck of Linguistic Interface Study and Its Way out in the Context of New Liberal Arts
In the past two decades, linguistic interface study informed by pragmatics has made great progress, but, due to the theoretical controversies between the semantics-pragmatics interface view and the context-determined view, it has hit a bottleneck. This article proposes a new linguistic interface view in the context of New Liberal Arts, which provides a way out. By introducing materialist dialectics, the cross-disciplinary research between linguistics and philosophy undoes the view of “taking a part for the whole” in the Western thought and proposes that convention and context are the unity of opposites, based on which default meaning is divided into structural default, socio-cultural default and situational default, and their context-dependence degrees increase in turn. “Linguistics+Computational Science” and “Linguistics+Experimental Science” deploy Chinese facts to verify “Linguistics+Philosophy”, facilitating the localization of pragmatics incorporating Chinese elements.
Key words： linguistic interface; New Liberal Arts; default meaning; context; convention
ZHANG Yanfei, LIU Hongdong . The Bottleneck of Linguistic Interface Study and Its Way out in the Context of New Liberal Arts[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2022 , 22(1) : 103 -110 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2022.01.008
| [1] | Austin J. 1962. How to Do Things with Words[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| [2] | Bach K. 1994. Conversational implicature[J]. Mind & Language 9(2):124-162. |
| [3] | Carston R. 2004. Truth-conditional content and conversational implicature[A]. In C. Bianchi (ed.). The Semantics/Pragmatics Distinction[C]. Stanford: CSLI Publications. 65-100. |
| [4] | Carston R. 2009. The explicit/implicit distinction in pragmatics and the limits of explicit communication[J]. International Review of Pragmatics 1:35-62. |
| [5] | Giora, R.& S. Givoni. 2015. Defaultness reigns: The case of sarcasm[J]. Metaphor and Symbol 30:290-313. |
| [6] | Grice P. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words[M]. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. |
| [7] | Jaszczolt K. 2005. Default Semantics. Foundations of a Compositional Theory of Acts of Communication[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. |
| [8] | Levinson S. 2000. Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature[M]. Cambridge: MIT Press. |
| [9] | Noveck I. 2018. Experimental Pragmatics: The Making of a Cognitive Science[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [10] | Noveck, I.& D. Sperber. 2004. Experimental Pragmatics[M]. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. |
| [11] | Recanati F. 2004. Literal Meaning[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [12] | Saussure F. 1916. Course in General Linguistics[M]. London: Duckworth. |
| [13] | Searle J 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [14] | Sperber, D.& D. Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition[M]. Oxford: Blackwell. |
| [15] | Stainton R. 2004. The Pragmatics of Non-sentences[A]. In L. Horn & G. Ward (eds.). The Handbook of Pragmatics[C]. Oxford: Blackwell. 266-287. |
| [16] | Wittgenstein L. 1953. The Philosophical Investigations[M]. New York: Macmillan. |
| [17] | 樊丽明. 2020. “新文科”:时代需求与建设重点[J]. 中国大学教学 (5) : 4-8. |
| [18] | 胡开宝. 2020. 新文科视域下外语学科的建设与发展——理念与路径[J]. 中国外语 (3):14-19. |
| [19] | 胡壮麟. 2002. 语境研究的多元化[J]. 外语教学与研究 (5):161-166. |
| [20] | 张绍杰. 2008. 一般会话含义的“两面性”与含义推导模式问题[J]. 外语教学与研究 (3) :196- 203,241. |
| [21] | 张绍杰. 2020. 语言界面观与外语教学理念创新[J]. 现代外语 (5) : 612-619. |
| [22] | 张延飞. 2018. 默认意义新解:语法-语用互动视角[J]. 外语与外语教学 (6) : 36-41. |
| [23] | 张延飞、 张绍杰. 2009. 后格赖斯语用学:含义默认解释模式综观[J]. 外语与外语教学 (8) : 1-6. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
