PL as a Nutritive Bowl for Linguistic Research （西）语言哲学是语言研究的营养钵 (Unpublished) Qian Guanlian

浙江大学、同济大学讲座提纲（2006-10) 中国英汉语比较研究会第七次全国学术研讨会主题发言提纲（烟台师范大学 2006-11-2） PL as a Nutritive Bowl for Linguistic Research（西）语言哲学是语言研究的营养钵(Unpublished)Qian Guanlian

Abstract Philosophy of language (PL), which aims at ‘recasting age-old philosophical questions in linguistic terms’, has been and is to be functioning as a nutritive bowl or feeding block (in my term) which, unconsciously or actually, has provided linguistic researchers with nutrition of various hues. However, quite few eyes have been focused on such a function.

Miraculously, nutrition of this kind has fermented, germinated and stimulated the development of semantics, pragmatics, and syntax etc, as by-products of the philosophical recasting. In the end of each section, it will be shown that each linguistic harvest (discipline) has grown along a corresponding track out of its philosophical start. In each of the tracks, an obvious process for philosophical inquiries to have fermented each of the given linguistic disciplines can be prominently revealed.

More miraculously, the aim of the second part is to comb out a new orientation and new questions from age-old philosophical ones. The hope is that the new orientation and new questions would lead to a new method of studying language which would both absorb the nutrition from the analytic tradition and contribute something new to modern language research in China.

0.1 The Thesis of the Present Study The author would like to reiterate and refine his long-standing view that the tie of the PL to linguistic research is that of a nutritive bowl (or feeding block) to a seedling within the bowl, and that of a cradle to a baby within the cradle. 0. 2 How Come the PL Arose at That Time? Ontology: the typical question: What is there? Epistemology: the typical question: What…? How…? What justification…? ‘The linguistic turn’: no typical question. the recasting of age-old philosophical questions in linguist terms.

Language: means of both understanding and solving philosophical problems The prototype in the analytic traditionmust be operated on the level of philosophical syntax. Russell, B.: ‘…there can be no doubt that the utility of philosophical syntax in relation to traditional problems is very great.’ What has been kept in their mind is: ---- how things stand/are in the world; ---- how our beliefs, desires and hopes concern the world.

When talking about the world, western philosophers often employ the following words as the synonyms of ‘the world’: △ the world △ (A) Thing(s) △ Reality △ Object △ Entity △ Being (as Being) △ Existence

1.1 From Theories of Reference to Semantics △ Theories of reference tell us how words relate to the world. △ Frege: sense vs. reference ？the morning star = evening star ？土豆＝马铃薯＝洋芉 △Russell: theory of descriptions ? The king of France is bald. …“the prototype of AP”

Conclusion: The Track from the Philosophical Aim to Semantics as a By-product Track 1: (how) things (stand/are in the world) → (how) words relate to the world + (what) a word/name/term/ proposition (refers to) → a theory of reference → a foundation of semantics Track 2: (how) things (stand/are in the world) → (how) words relate both to other words and to the beliefs and intentions of the speakers of those words → a theory of meaning (if under the umbrella of the truth-conditional theory of meaning) → semantics (as a by-product ){bivalence}

2. From Theories of Meaning to Pragmatics 2.1 Bivalence (二值逻辑的束缚) 2.2 Austin’s philosophical investigations as his promotion of pragmatics △ Things are true or false depending on whether or not they correspond to the way things are.Performatives are not true or false in the same sense. Wittgenstein…..

Conclusion: The Track from the Philosophical Aim to Pragmatics as a By-product (how) things (stand/are in the world) → (how) words relate both to other words and to the beliefs and intentions of the speakers of those words → a theory of meaning ( but under the umbrella of the use-theory of meaning + multichotomy+ ‘meaning is the production of an interaction’) →pragmatics(as a by-product) Vs Track 2: ……→ a theory of meaning (if under the umbrella of the truth-conditional theory of meaning) → semantics (as a by- product ) {bivalence}

3. From Theories of Meaning to Translation within Different Languages and Cultures Tarski’s Convention T: ‘x is true iff p.’ “Snow is white” is true iff snow is white. In other words, translation within different languages (and cultures) is one kind of extension of a translation-relation in a given language within that same language. So translation within different languages (and cultures) is one kind of expanding perspective ona metalanguage. radical interpretation the principle of charity

Conclusion: The Track from the Philosophical Aim to Translatology as a By-product Track 1: the semantic paradoxes → (distinction between) an object language and a metalanguage → a translation-relation (in a given language within that same language) → translation within different languages (and cultures) → translatology (as a by-product) Track 2: a manual of translation → radical interpretation → the interpretation (of foreign, previously unknown, languages) →[the requirements and the preconditions for learning/translation/interpreting a language] → translatology (as a by-product)

4. From Philosophical Study to Syntax as a By-product Conclusion: The Track from the Philosophical Aim to Syntax as a By-product Dummett’s track: the goal of philosophy → the analysis of the structure of thought → by the analysis of language (as vehicle of thought) → syntax (as a by-product) Russell’s track: traditional problems→ utility of philosophical syntax→ syntax (as a by-product) Qian’s track: the structure of sentence→ that of the cosmos → that of thought→ co-structure of the three →theory of language holography→ syntax (as a by-product)

Some New Linguistic Discoveries Inspired Directly from the PL in the Analytic Tradition 1. The Harm of the Purely-Analytic Examination Model △“还是要整合性考试——纯分析性考试为何是失误” △ “现在存在着一种很大的压力，竞相利用新的教育技术，借助最新的科学发展来设计课程与教学方法。……这些方法可能加害与扭曲创造能力的正常发展，因为，这些方法削减了呈现在爱探索的头脑面前的这些材料的范围与复杂性，把行为放在一些固定的框框之内限制起来了。”(Chomsky, 1972; Baghramian 1999: 295) 难道，搞掉人的创造能力就是现代教育的目标吗？

4. A New Perspective on Rhetoric 猜想：凡是语言使用过程中，涉及呈现方式、描述属性与认知活动时，必涉及修辞活动 △修辞可以是一种哲学活动 4.1 从寻找不同的呈现方式与不同的认知内容出发（Frege）； e.g. 土豆就是洋芋，洋芋就是马铃薯 4.2 从描述（摹状）事物属性与交待事物指称出发（Russell; Donnellan）； e.g. 打不倒的矮个子 4.3 从讨论事物的非严格（非固定）指示记号出发（Kripke）； e.g. 我国自己培养的第一代航天员 4.4从工具性语言出发（Tarski）（see Section 2）； 4.5从认知相似性出发（Wittgenstein）； △出现修辞用法的机理是：选择了一个既相似又偏离于原型的最新最巧的表达式， e.g.猪脑袋 4.6从寻求命题事态出发； 4.7从寻求语言与存在之间的关系出发 e.g. 猴子探海

Conclusion • Naturally, philosophy provides linguistic researchers with its nutrition of various hues. (语言研究怎样和如何吸取营养？) • Philosophers of language have gainedthe theories on the worldfrom the analysis of philosophical syntax (see below), from which, in turn, linguists,the theories on language. (你从哲学句法分析里得到世界的道理，我从哲学句法分析里得到语言的道理。语义学、语用学、句法、翻译、语言习得理论… …就是这样形成的。我从你那里拣到了便宜。) • The philosophical syntax refers to sentences, proper names, nouns, phrases or expressions in language. • Any concept and meaning cannot but exist within language. “We cannot strip away the conceptual trappings sentence by sentence and leave a description of the objective world.” (Quine, W.V.O. Word and Object. M.I.T Press, p.5)

2. More significantly, we gain wisdom which makes our eye-span of linguistic researches much more greater and greater. 根本性的营养吸收方法：学习一段路的西哲老问题，但不纠缠与翻炒，而是节外生新枝——形成一个一个的语言与社会的新问题。（2005年教育部重大项目。） Not that knowledge is power, but that knowledge plus wisdom is power. “Philosophy is the battle against the bewitchment by language.” (Wittgenstein) For example, expected achievements are as follows : • Philosophical Ethos of the School of Names and Its Being Curbed（刘利民）； • A Metalanguage Mechanism (王爱华); • Unsayability (梁瑞清) ； • A New Theory of Rhetoric (钱冠连）回到主页

PL as a Nutritive Bowl for Linguistic Research （西）语言哲学是语言研究的营养钵 (Unpublished) Qian Guanlian