汉语句法构造的哲学基础探析——基于亚里士多德逻辑与墨辩逻辑的对比分析  

Philosophical Ontology for the Syntax of Mandarin Chinese: A Comparative Study of Aristotelian Logic and Mohist Logic

作　　者：满海霞[1] MAN Hai-xia

机构地区：[1]北京科技大学外国语学院

出　　处：《天津外国语大学学报》2021年第6期96-106,157,共12页Journal of Tianjin Foreign Studies University

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“面向计算机人工智能的组合范畴语法研究”(17ZDA027);国家社会科学基金重大项目“大数据背景下人工智能及其逻辑的哲学反思”(19ZDA041);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目“逻辑、语用型语言与CCG语义的构建与研究”(FRF-BR-20-BA)。

摘　　要：传统语法以词类划分和主谓结构思想构成语句最基本的句法结构性,其形而上的哲学基础是亚里士多德的范畴观与谓述思想。汉语缺乏系统的形态标记,词类划分缺乏形态依据。关于汉语的语法研究不断证明,以基于亚里士多德逻辑的传统语法分析汉语有诸多不适,应回到我们自己的逻辑经典中,寻找汉语句法构句的密钥。通过对比亚里士多德逻辑与中国古代逻辑经典墨辩逻辑如何定义概念与语言、概念与世界的关系、如何利用初始概念形成逻辑判断,为"主语-谓语"结构与"话题-说明"结构的差异找到哲学与逻辑上的基础。同时,从语言学研究对语言主观性的觉察入手,提出自然语言表达逻辑谓述关系的抽象模型P(X(S)),为两种逻辑以及两种语言所体现的差异给出合理的解释,并指出汉语句法的下一步研究重点为重构涵盖"世界-主观性-语言"的三元关系分析模式。Both traditional grammar and its important concepts of parts of speech and subject-predicate structure can be metaphysically traced back to Aristotle’s theory on categories and predication. Existing studies on Chinese grammar have proved that analyzing Chinese sentences with such a grammar of Aristotelian tradition can generate many problems due to Chinese’s lack of morphological markers. Thus, we should go back all the way to ancient Chinese logic—Mohist logic for the logical foundation of Mandarin Chinese by comparing the two logics in terms of how each of them relates basic concepts to languages and the world, and how a logical judgement is formed from basic concepts therein. A formalized way is put forward to show how logical statements are made by natural languages with the assistance of combinators in combinatory logic so as to better explain the differences shown by the two logics and the two languages that the two logics grow from. A world-subjectivity-language model is thus proposed for future studies on the syntax of Mandarin Chinese.

关 键 词：亚里士多德逻辑 墨辩逻辑 汉语 句法构造 主观性组合子 

分 类 号：H146.3[语言文字—汉语]