【作者】 高波；

【机构】 北京理工大学；

【摘要】 本文讨论了构式语法理论的哲学基础。有人认为构式语法和认知语言学有同样的哲学基础,即体验主义。作者认为这一简单而笼统的说法不够严谨。构式语法现有六个分支,需具体加以区分,毕竟不同的构式语法可能有不同的语言哲学观。因为语言学与哲学之间有内在的必然联系,语言学派的差异最终都可以追溯到不同的语言哲学观。同样,在构式语法的发展中,哲学中的理性主义与体验主义语言观对其各分支的产生和发展也起到了根本性的推动作用。那么揭示其哲学基础的动因可以更好地理解并发展该理论。鉴于此,本文首先系统地梳理了构式语法理论的发展脉络,从哲学观角度重新审视了构式语法各分支之间的传承和异同,指出构式语法各分支其实是从生成语法到认知语法之间的连续统。然后通过追溯其哲学渊源及其与三代认知科学之间的关系,指出基于合一的构式模型倾向于理性主义,而非合一模型则基于体验主义。具体地说,Fillmore等人的伯克利构式语法(BCG)和Sag为代表的基于符号构式语法(SBCG)受到第一代认知科学的持续影响,是基于理性主义的;Goldberg等的认知构式语法(CCG)和Croft的激进构式语法(RCG)是第二代认知科学运动的一部分,是基于体验主义的;而基于语言模拟的动变构式语法(FCG)和体认构式语法(ECG)都用计算机模拟语言,则受到体验主义和理性主义的双重影响,代表了第三代认知科学运动中语言学研究的主要发展方向。最后作者以双及物构式的研究为例,对比了有代表性的伯克利构式语法、认知构式语法和体认构式语法,从表征等层面解释了上述假设。人们往往强调理性主义和体验主义对立冲突的一面,而忽视了其趋近融合;其实理性主义、经验主义和体验主义彼此虽然观点独立,但日趋相互影响相互融合。构式语法理论淡化了二者之间的冲突,实现了其互补的可能性。构式语法理论的发展呈现两种趋势,即基于理性主义的符号观和基于体验主义的认知观。正是这种结合使得构式语法更具解释力。更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper-discusses the philosophical foundation of Construction Grammar theories.It is said that Construction Grammar shares the same philosophical foundation with Cognitive Linguistics,namely,embodied realism.The author-thinks this general and simple claim is not precise enough.It is argued that we need to distinguish the six Construction Grammar theories because they probably hold different philosophical foundations.There is intrinsic relationship between Linguistics and Philosophy,so the difference among linguistics schools can be traced- back to that in philosophy of language.Likewise,philosophical rationalism and embodied realism also played a fundamental role in motivating the birth and growth of different Construction Grammars.Thus Construction Grammar can be better understood and developed if its philosophical foundation can be revealed.This paper,therefore,begins with systematically reviewing the birth and growth of Construction Grammar theories,by clarifying the connection,similarities and differences among them from the perspective of philosophical foundation.It is pointed out that Construction Grammar theories form a continuum between Generative Grammar and Cognitive Grammar or they bridge Cognitive Grammar and Generative Grammar.By relating its philosophical foundation to three-generation cognitive sciences,it proposes that the birth and growth of different theories were motivated by philosophical foundations:Or rather unification-based construction grammars are more influenced by rationalism whereas the non-unification-based construction grammars are more influenced by embodfed realism.In detail,Fillmore and Kay’s Berkeley Construction Grammar and Sag’s Sign-Based Construction Grammar show the continuous influence of the first-generation Cognitive Science,thus being based on rationalism;Goldberg and Lakoff’s Cognitive Construction Grammar and Croft’s Radical Construction Grammar is part of the second-generation Cognitive Science,or based on embodied realism;and Fluid Construction Grammar and Embodied Construction Grammar,both engaged in language simulation on computers,are under the double influence of both embodied realism and rationalism,thus representing the major direction of linguistics in the third-generation Cognitive Science.Different studies of ditransitive construction are analyzed to compare the representative Berkeley Construction Grammar,Cognitive Construction Grammar and Embodied Construction Grammar in order to explain the proposed assumption.People tend to stress the conflict between rationalism and embodied realism,while ignoring the converging tendency.Actually rationalism,experientialism and embodied realism are independent,but they seem to influence each other and converge to some degree.Construction Grammars weakens the conflict,making the complement possible.Construction Grammars tend to develop in two directions,the sign view of rationalism and cognitive view of embodied realism.This combination makes Construction Grammar more interpretative.更多还原