单称常项、直接指称与亲知—启发性含义  

Singular Constants,Direct Reference and Acquaintance⁃Revelatory Sense

作　　者：刘叶涛 寇静茹 Liu Ye-tao;Kou Jing-ru(College of Philosophy,Nankai University,Tianjin 300350,China)

机构地区：[1]南开大学哲学院,天津300350

出　　处：《外语学刊》2024年第4期90-96,共7页Foreign Language Research

基　　金：国家社会科学基金项目“意义与指称理论前沿问题研究”(21BZX04)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：唐纳兰通过区分限定摹状词的语义功能对“谓词首位思想”提出的挑战,因其在逻辑与语言哲学上的诸多关联,以及在描述论与直接指称论论战中引发的诸多重要后果而备受关注。唐纳兰对于限定摹状词语义功能的区分遭到质疑,而对其起支撑作用的从言—从物区分这一直接指称论原则的合理性也遭到描述论的驳斥,并揭示出直接指称论无法在实际中成功指称对象的理论困难。克里普克的“启发性含义”思想及与此相关的对意向性隐含的认同和应用,可视为对此的某种回应。这使得寻找作为对立双方的塞尔与克里普克的互动与融通的出路成为可能。Donnellan's challenge to the idea of“primacy of predicates”by distinguishing semantic functions of definite description has attracted much attention because of its multiple connections in logic and philosophy of language,along with many important con⁃sequences in the debate between Descriptive Theory and Direct Reference Theory.Donnellan's distinguishment for the semantic function of definite description is questioned,and the rationality of the distinction of de dicto⁃de re,the principle of Direct Refe⁃rence Theory on which it relies,is refuted by Descriptive Theory as well.It also reveals the theoretical difficulty of Direct Refe⁃rence Theory in successfully referring to objects in reference practice.Kripke's idea of“revelatory sense”and its associated im⁃plicit acception and application of Intentionality can be regarded as a response to the theoretical predicament,and makes it possi⁃ble to find a way of interaction and integration between Searle and Kripke.

关 键 词：单称常项 限定摹状词 直接指称 从言—从物区分 启发性含义 意向性 

分 类 号：B089[哲学宗教—哲学理论]