再论文学艺术的超符号性质——兼答唐小林先生  

Rethinking of the Extra-semiotics Nature of Literature: Begin with the Icons of Tobacco Pipe and High-heel on Toilet Doors and Answer to Mr. Tang Xiaolin

作　　者：陈炎[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东大学

出　　处：《南京社会科学》2014年第5期122-128,共7页Nanjing Journal of Social Sciences

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大课题"文明的结构与艺术的功能"(07JJD751079)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：唐小林先生从皮尔斯的符号论出发,捍卫了卡西尔将艺术等同于符号的观点。他不仅对拙作奠基于索绪尔符号论的相反观点进行了有意义的商榷,而且还试图揭示索绪尔符号论在处理艺术问题上的局限性。但由于他误将"非理据性"等同于"约定性",并反过来认为具有"理据性"的符号不需要"约定"也能传递意义,从而推导出艺术是具有"理据性"的"符号"的结论。由于这一结论抹煞了"符号"所携带的"概念"与"艺术"所表达的"情感"之间的关键性差异,因而值得进一步商榷。在笔者看来,艺术不是有"意义"的"符号",而是有"意味"的"形式"。Based on Peirce's semiotics,Mr. Tang Xiaolin attempted to defend Cassirer's claim about the identity between art and symbol. He has proposed a discussion about my contrary view based on Saussure's semiotics and attempted to reveal the inadequacy of Saussure's semiotics when it meets art as well. It seems that he firstly mistakes‘non-warrant'as‘convention'and conversely supposes symbol with‘warrant'is able to convey meaning without the help of‘convention', so he concludes that art is a sort of symbols with‘warrant'. A further discussion should be necessary for his conclusion ineptly repudiates the key difference between concepts with symbols and feeling with art. In my view,art is the form with significance rather than the symbol with concept.

关 键 词：符号 艺术 理据 约定 形式 意味 

分 类 号：I04[文学—文学理论]