名义摹状词理论及其反驳与辩护  

The Nominal Description Theory and Its Refutation and Defense

作　　者：马文忠 Wenzhong Ma

机构地区：[1]同济大学人文学院

出　　处：《逻辑学研究》2023年第4期75-88,共14页Studies in Logic

摘　　要：在解释专名在语言中的语义作用问题上,传统的直接指称理论和实质描述理论都不能很好地处理专名的空名问题、复数与修饰问题以及共享名称问题。为了处理这类问题,巴赫发展了一种“名义摹状词理论”。该理论称出现在句子中的专名“N”语义等值于名义摹状词“‘N’的那个承载者”。但该观点遭到来自模态、认知和翻译方面的反驳。本文首先阐述了该理论的基本观点及其优势,然后分析了这三个方面的反驳,最后表明这三个方面的反驳并没有真正成功。这三个方面的反驳在某种程度上预设了专名和摹状词作指称性使用,但这种预设并没有得到辩护。存在专名和摹状词作谓述性使用的读法,即在人们对专名和摹状词完全陌生的情形中。因此,名义摹状词理论并没有被真正驳倒。In explaining the semantic function of proper names in language,neither the tadi-tional direct reference theory nor the substantive description theory can deal well with such problems as the empty name problem,the plural and modification problem and the shared name problem.To deal with this kind of problem,Kent Bach developed a“nom-inal description theory”According to this theory,the proper name“N”in a sentence is semantically equivalent to the description“the bearer of ‘N’” However,this theory has been refuted by modal,epistemic and tanslation arguments.This paper first expounds the basic point of view of the theory and its advantages,and then analyzes the refutations in these three aspects,and finally shows that the refutations in these three aspects are not really successful.To some extent,the refutation from these three aspects presupposes proper names and descriptions as referential use,but this presupposition has not been defended.There are pronunciations for the descriptive use of proper names and descrip-tions,that is,in situations where people are completely unfamiliar with proper names and descriptions.Therefore,the nominal description theory is not really refuted.

关 键 词：名义摹状词 专名的谓词观 模态论证 认知论证 翻译论证 

分 类 号：B81[哲学宗教—逻辑学]