【作者】 刘焱；

【导师】 程泰宁；

【作者基本信息】 东南大学 ， 建筑设计及其理论， 2024， 博士

【摘要】 “形式语言”作为建筑领域当中最常见的组合概念之一,其熟稔的表象常使人失去探究与凝思的动力。复杂的历史与文化语境、交织的知识传播路径以及各种现实意图的干预使得该概念深陷碎片、模糊与曲解的泥潭之中,国内对西方相关理论的认知不足与批判缺失也导致了建筑理论与实践的双重困境。与许多人对“形式语言”简单的固有印象相反,“语言”与“形式”作为两个概念在1950年代前的发展相对独立,其真正的合流源自于19世纪末20世纪初哲学领域发生的“语言学转向”。“语言学转向”作为一种广泛的理论思潮几乎影响了整个西方知识界并被作为一种理论范式引入各个学科当中,建筑领域中的“形式”与“语言”概念由于特殊的历史语境以及两者的共通性得以建立结构性关联。由此,本文以“语言学转向”影响下的建筑形式理论为研究对象,在知识构成分析方法的关联性考查框架下,以1950年代末以来不同的建筑师及团体在“语言学转向”思潮影响下,借助现代语言学、符号学、数理逻辑学等理论成果,围绕“形式”议题展开的包含观念、方法与实践的持续性探索为主线,将“语言”与“形式”理论的关联性与作用机制作为研究重点。本研究认为,“语言”首先能够作为解释当代建筑形式理论与实践现实的关键线索。尽管西方在1950年代后的建筑形式理论与实践探索呈现出迥然不同的风格与样貌,但其背后遵循了一条隐含的建构逻辑,即基于语言学范式进行的知识建构,其发端于哲学领域的“语言学转向”以及其在思想界的巨大影响。“语言”作为中介对建筑形式理论的塑造主要通过三条线索进行,分别为:语言作为形式与功能重构的中介(形式-语言-功能)、语言作为形式与含义意指的中介(形式-语言-含义)、语言作为形式自治的中介(形式-语言-形式)。“形式-语言-功能”源自于二战后对功能主义、国际风格的质疑与不满。借助“语言”理论,形式与功能不但在观念层面获得了的全新内涵与关联,而且在方法层面形成了基于合理化程序的设计方法。“形式-语言-含义”源自于现代主义当中人文与历史要素的缺失,“语言”为建筑形式的含义议题提供了结构主义的研究视角以及诸多概念与理论认知,同时促进了基于含义的形式设计理论的产生。“形式-语言-形式”源自于艺术史研究中的形式主义传统与建筑自主性议题,“语言”拓展了形式主义研究的认知理论并发展出相关的形式生成方法。在此基础上,“语言”能够作为当代建筑形式理论批判的重要视角。本研究认为,形式理论中诸多问题的实质是语言学范式的固有局限在建筑领域的映射以及适应性问题。尽管语言学范式相较于传统人文学科更为严谨与精确,但其表现出对科学理性的偏执、先验的语言中心论以及反人本、反历史等弊端。“语言”介入建筑形式议题的同时也引入了其局限性,三条基本线索表现为不同的现实困境。“形式-语言-功能”的本质是功能理性的延续,“形式-语言-含义”使形式陷入了含义的牢笼之中,“形式-语言-形式”则沦为形式自治的游戏。此外,对西方“语言”形式理论的批判也构成中国当代建筑理论建构的基础。建筑“语言”形式理论局限性的根源在于沿袭了西方知识界的“语言本体”倾向,即语言不再只是人与人之间交流的工具,而是表明万物的本原与本质。通过跨文化比较,基于中国传统语言观念的“言、象、意”体系提供了一条由“语言本体”向“语言工具”转变的可能路径。论文分为六个部分。第一部分为研究背景与问题的提出,包含第一章,概述了“语言学转向”影响下建筑形式理论的相关研究,明确了研究内容、目的、方法与意义。第二部分为历史语境的建构,包含第二章,阐明了“语言学转向”影响下建筑形式理论的四个发展阶段,为后续章节研究提供理论、历史背景与论述的基础。第三部分为“语言”与“形式”的作用机制研究,包含第三、四、五章。该部分系统性回答了“语言”如何介入至建筑的形式议题当中,包括介入的动因、相关路径(观念、方法与实践层面)以及其背后的“语言”关联与机制。三、四、五章基于“语言”介入建筑形式议题的不同方式分别展开,包括“形式-语言-功能”、“形式-语言-含义”与“形式-语言-形式”。第四部分为局限性反思与理论批判,包含第六章,旨在系统性揭示语言学范式的局限性及其在形式理论方面的不同表征。第五部分为理论转变的可能路径研究,包含第七章。基于中西方语言观念比较,提出了由“语言本体”向“语言工具”转变的可能路径。第六部分为结论与展望,包含第八章,总结了“语言”在建筑形式理论研究中的作用,并对未来的工作进行了展望。本文正文共约210000字,图116幅。更多还原

【Abstract】 As one of the most common concepts in architecture,the familiar appearance of"form language"always makes people lose the motivation to explore and contemplate.The complex historical and cultural context,intertwined paths of knowledge transfer,and the interventions of various practical intentions have made the concept mired in fragmentation,ambiguity,and misinterpretation.The lack of understanding and criticism has also led to the dilemma of architectural theory and practice.Contrary to the simple and inherent impression of"form language",language and form are two concepts developed independently before the 1950s.The combination of the two concepts originated in the“linguistic turn”of philosophy at the end of the 19th century.As an ideological trend,the"linguistic turn"has influenced almost the entire Western intellectual community and has been introduced into various disciplines as a theoretical paradigm.Form and language have established a structural relationship due to the special historical context of the 1950s and their commonality in architecture.Therefore,under the framework of discursive formation,this article takes the theories of architectural form under the influence of"linguistic turn"as the research object.Based on the continuous explorations of concepts,methods and practices around the issue of form by different architects and groups since the late 1950s,this research focuses on the correlation and mechanism of language and form theories.The paper points out that language can be used as a key clue to explain architectural reality.Although Western theoretical and practical explorations of architectural form present completely different appearances from the 1950s,the knowledge based on the linguistic paradigm which originated from"linguistic turn"of philosophy is the implicit construction logic.Language intervenes in the theories of architectural form mainly through three clues:language as an intermediary for the reconstruction of form and function(form-language-function);language as an intermediary for the signification between form and meaning(form-language-meaning);language as an intermediary for the formal autonomy(form-language-form).The clue of"form-language-function"derives from the doubts about functionalism and international style.Through language theories,new connotations and connections between form and function are obtained at the epistemological dimension,and design methods based on rational programs are also developed at the methodological dimension.The clue of"form-language-meaning"originates from the lack of humanistic and historical elements in modernism.Language provides a structuralist research perspective and conceptual cognitions on the meaning of architectural form,and promotes the emergence of meaning-based formal design theories.The clue of"form-language-form"originates from the formalist tradition in art historical research and architectural autonomy issues.Language expands the cognitive theories of formalist research and develops related form generation methods.On this basis,language can serve as an important perspective for the criticism of contemporary theories of architectural form.This research believes that the essence of many problems presented by architectural form theories is the mapping of the inherent limitations of linguistic paradigm.Although the linguistic paradigm is more rigorous and precise than the traditional humanities disciplines,it still has defects such as the paranoia on scientific rationality,the transcendental language-centrism,the anti-humanism and anti-history tendencies.When language intervenes in the issue of architectural form,its limitations are also introduced.The three basic clues present different realistic dilemmas.The essence of"form-language-function"is the continuation of functional rationality,"form-language-meaning"makes form fall into the cage of meaning,and"form-language-form"becomes a game of formal autonomy.In addition,the criticism of Western form language theories is also the basis for the construction of Chinese contemporary architectural theories.The root cause of the limitations of relevant theories lies in the inheritance of the"language ontology"tendency in Western intelligentsia,language is no longer a tool for communication,but the origin and essence of all objects.Through cross-cultural comparison,the"Yan(言),Xiang(象),and Yi(意)"system based on traditional Chinese language concepts provides a possible path to transform from"language ontology"to"language tools".This thesis contains six parts.Chapter 1 introduces the research background and the proposal of the topic,outlines the relevant research on the theories of architectural form under the influence of"linguistic turn"and clarifies the research contents,purpose,methods and significance.Chapter 2 is the construction of historical context.It clarifies the four development stages of architectural form theories under the influence of"linguistic turn",providing a theoretical,historical context and discussion basis for the subsequent research.Chapters 3～5 are the study of the mechanism of"language"and"form".This part systematically answers the question of how language intervenes in the formal issues of architecture,including the motivations,the routes(concepts,methods,and practices),the connections and mechanisms.Chapters 3～5 are respectively developed based on the different ways in which language intervenes in architectural form issues,including"form-language-function","form-language-meaning"and"form-language-form".Chapter 6 systematically reveals the limitations of the linguistics paradigm and its representation in formal theories.Chapter 7 proposes a possible path to transform from"language ontology"to"language tools"based on the comparison of Chinese and Western language concepts.Chapter 8 is the conclusion and outlook of the research.This thesis is about 210,000 words,with 116 figures.更多还原