关于语言学史和历史学科的关系的一点思考——兼与历史学研究者王东杰同志商榷  

The Relation between History of Chinese Linguistics and History

作　　者：薄守生[1] 赖慧玲[1] 

机构地区：[1]郑州大学文学院,河南郑州450001

出　　处：《新疆大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2016年第5期129-138,共10页Journal of Xinjiang University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目"民国语言学史"(12XYY001)

摘　　要：语言学史研究在史学领域可能被看做是一种"碎片化"研究,历史学研究者也很少研究语言学史。近年来,少数历史学研究者发表过少数涉及语言学史研究的论文,这些论文对语言学研究有很大的启发意义,但其中的有些论文也存在一些错漏之处。在此,我们以历史学研究者王东杰发表的几篇论文为例,论述其优缺点。其缺点有:语言学的术语使用不规范,存在少数笔误或者硬伤、缺乏正确的语言学观念的指导,把语言问题政治化时过于简单、表面化,史论与史料的衔接不够严谨、科学。其优点有:相对于传统的语言学论文来说显得宏观、大气,论点的主线意识较强,这些优点值得语言学研究者学习。语言学史研究难度很大,需要以语言学研究者为主力和主导、辅以历史学研究者的帮助和指导,双方真正深入地互助结合。The study of history of Chinese linguistics can be seen as a fragment in historical studies and history researchers rarely study history of Chinese linguistics. In recent years, a few history researchers have published papers in this field which are of great significance to the linguists. These papers, however, have some errors. Take papers written by WANG Dong-jie as an example. The defects include the non-standardized use of linguistic terms, a few serious errors, lack of correct linguistic guidance, over simplified and superficial politicization of language issues, and the not rigorous or scientific connection of historical argument with historical materials. The merits are macroscopic,high and grand, with a legible and main line in the argument, all of which is valuable for linguists. The research in history of Chinese linguistics is very difficult, which means that linguists and history researchers must truly work each other, linguists being the main and leading force with the supplement and guidance of history researchers.

关 键 词：近代国语运动 术语 错漏 互助结合 民国语言学史 

分 类 号：H009[语言文字—语言学]