|
Modern Linguistics 2019
一场关于狭义语言官能范围界定的伟大辩论
|
Abstract:
2002年至2005年,乔姆斯基和平克等人在《科学》和《认知》连续发表四篇文章讨论狭义语言官能的问题。本文将主要采用文本分析的方式,对这四篇论文进行综合考察与论述。通过回顾当年的争论历程并分析文中所列举的多样化跨学科的大量例证,试着总结乔姆斯基和平克等人各自的立场观点并对其进行对比研究。
From 2002 to 2005, four articles are published by Noam Chomsky and Steven Pinker et al. in Sci-ence and Cognition in order to discuss the problem of Narrow Language Faculty. This paper is aimed to conduct a comprehensive investigation on the above four papers in the light of text analysis and to compare the respective positions of Chomsky and Pinker with the help of diverse in-terdisciplinary examples listed in these articles.
[1] | Hauser, M., Chomsky, N. and Fitch, W. (2002) The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It and How Did It Evolve? Science, 298, 1569-1579. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.298.5598.1569 |
[2] | Pinker, S. and Jackendoff, R. (2005) The Faculty of Language: What’s Special about It? Cognition, 95, 201-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.004 |
[3] | Fitch, W., Hauser, M. and Chomsky, N. (2005) The Evolution of the Language Faculty: Clarifications and Implications. Cognition, 97, 179-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.005 |
[4] | Jackendoff, R. and Pinker, S. (2005) The Nature of the Language Faculty and Its Implications for Evolution of Language. Cognition, 97, 211-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.04.006 |
[5] | 骆明琼. 乔姆斯基教授访谈实录[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 2017, 40(4): 109-112. |
[6] | 丁彧藻, 陈保亚. 对《科学》和《自然》上两个递归实验的质疑: 基于对汉语母语者的测试[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 2018, 41(5): 81-89. |
[7] | 杨烈祥. 唯递归论的跨语言比较述评[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2012, 44(1): 54-64+158. |
[8] | 李芝. S. Pinker的生物语言学思想评析[J]. 北京林业大学学报(社会科学版), 2010, 9(4): 121-124. |
[9] | Hauser, M., Chomsky, N., Fitch, W., 谢玉杰, 鲁守春.《语言机能》述评[J]. 当代语言学, 2005, 7(1): 86-91. |
[10] | 孙欠欠.《语言机能》述评——《语言机能: 是什么, 谁拥有, 如何进化的?》述评[J]. 科技信息, 2013(2): 222. |
[11] | Hilpert, M. (2014). Construction Grammar and Its Application to English. Edinburgh University Press, London, 1-3. |
[12] | 吴会芹. “语言官能”假说之争中的高端对决[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 2009, 32(4): 63-70. |