【作者】 张爱珍；

【导师】 陈维振；

【作者基本信息】 福建师范大学 ， 语言学及应用语言学， 2010， 博士

【副题名】从逻辑分析到语法考察

【摘要】 模糊语义与其它语义的不确定性的根本区别在于,语义范畴的外延缺乏明确边界,以及语义范畴内的部分成员处于临界状态。由于语义模糊性无法通过上下文得以完全消除,我们难以对模糊谓词所在的命题做出非真即假的判断,因此,逻辑和语义学应该如何处理模糊语词和模糊概念成为模糊语义研究的一大困难。本文系统地梳理了模糊语义逻辑研究的主要经典理论的创建动机、核心内容和不足之处,指出传统的二值逻辑无法有效解释模糊语义现象；多值逻辑、无穷多值理论、模糊集合论、超真值理论等逻辑分析途径,试图通过扩展和延伸传统逻辑系统来解决模糊语义问题,尽管它们具有一定的实际应用价值,但这种符号化、抽象化的研究方式忽略了语言在语用和语境维度中的意义,导致了符号系统内部的循环论证,因而难以充当模糊语义的解释性理论。模糊语义的认识论观点是对模糊语义研究的一次逻辑突围,它承认二值逻辑的有效性,并认为模糊谓词的外延有明确界限,模糊现象之所以产生是由于我们的无知所造成的,文章表明这一论断同样不具备说服力。基于上述分析,文章通过对后期维特根斯坦语言观的全面解读,从中总结出“语法考察”的研究范式,并藉此来探讨模糊语义研究从逻辑分析回归到日常语言研究中的必要性和可行性。以此为理论资源,文章进一步运用“语法考察”手段,深入地探究了模糊语义的根源、性质、理解、规则遵行等模糊语义研究理论构建中的核心问题,指出语言不仅包括符号系统本身,也不尽然是用来反映世界、对世界做出类属划分,相反地,它是以不同方式和我们生活紧密编织在一起,发挥着不同的功能。因此,我们必须突破传统的“本质-偶性”模式来考察模糊语义问题,只有在语言的具体使用中,通过语境的整体关联,把生活形式作为理解的生活图景,模糊语义的表达和理解才能得以具体实现。更多还原

【Abstract】 Vagueness in meaning remarkably distinguishes itself from other forms of semantic indeterminacy by the fact that vague predicates apparently lack well-defined extensions and there are borderline cases where it is unclear whether or not the predicates apply. Not being able to be totally removed by context, vagueness is thus defined as one of the essential features of language, arousing wide and lasting concern from a great many linguists, philosophers, and logicians. In particular, how logic and semantics should approach the problem of vague expressions and vague concepts has all along been a major challenge in the study of vagueness.The first part of the project is historical.It traces the main theories of the logical approaches to vagueness in terms of their motives, contents and inadequacies. This part is also critical. It argues that in response to classical logic’s inability to answer the challenges from vague phenomena, the many-valued logic, the degree theory, the fuzzy sets theory and supervaluationism, all in their attempt to extend the classical logical system, still can’t serve as satisfactory theories for vagueness in spite of their practical values, for their resort to abstraction and symbols in the analysis of meaning, not taking the role played by context into account, will inevitably lead to circular argument within the logical system. On the other hand, the epistemic view of vagueness defends the validity of classical logic, proposing that statements still remain true or false even in the case of unclarity, and that vague phenomena emerge only as a result of our ignorance of where the boundary is. This notion, as demonstrated by this paper, is also not convincing.In view of what has been discussed above along with a deep insight into later Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language, especially the way how he made a "grammatical investigation"into the nature of language, the thesis of the project is that the study of vagueness shoud be conducted more in the context of ordinary language instead of the mere realm of logic. In light of this, the paper makes a thorough investigation into the core problems concerning the theoretical study of vagueness in terms of its fundamental cause, nature, comprehension, and rule-following problem, concluding that language is not just a semiotic system, a reflection of the outside world, or a categorization of the objects, but rather it is interwined with our life in different ways fulfilling different functions. Therefore, instead of finding out the "essential-accidental" nature of concepts, we should refelct on how they are used. Only in the actual use under the setting of our forms of life can the vagueness in meaning be conveyed and comprehended.更多还原