一、语义学视角下语义的表现
（一）王寅教授的分析
(1)说话人意义（speaker?s meaning）, 受话人的意义（hearer?s meaning）[语言交际过程中参与者的角色分析]
(2)自然意义（natural meaning）和非自然意义（unnatural meaning）
(3)词素义（morpheme meaning）, 词义（word meaning）, 句义（sentence meaning）, 话词义（utterance meaning）, 语篇义（discourse meaning）
(4)内涵义（intensional meaning ）与外延义（extentional meaning）[从哲学和逻辑学角度]
(5)概念意义和附加意义（conceptual meaning and added meaning）
（二）、Leech 对意义的区分七种
Leech recognizes seven types of meaning in his Semantics
1)Conceptual meaning :logical, cognitive, or denotative content
2)Connotative meaning: What is communicated by virtue of what language refers to
3)Social meaning: What is communicated of the social circumstances of language use
4)Affective meaning: What is communicated of the feelings and attitudes of the speaker/writer
5)Reflected meaning : What is communicated through association with another sense of the same expression
6)Collocative meaning: What is communicated through association with words which tend to occur in the environment of
another word
7)Thematic meaning: What is communicated by the way in which the message is organized in terms of order and
emphasis.
以下为对上述的解释
1、自然意义，非自然意义Natural meaning and non-natural meaning
Natural meaning and nonnatural meaning is put forward by Grice in his famous article “Meaning”.
As for natural meaning, there is the evidential relationship between a cause and its effect. An example of natural meaning is “Those spots mean measles.” “x means y” is related to “x shows that y,” “x is a symptom of y” and “x lawfully correlates with y”. Those spots on little Jimmy do not really mean measles in natural meaning, if Jimmy does not have measles, even if the spots typically correlate with measles.
Nonnatural meaning pertains to language and communication. It means words and speakers. On nonnatural s ense, “x means y” is closer to “x says/asserts that y”, “x expresses y”. And when “x means y” is the case, it will usually be true that someone, or some group, means something by x. In nonnatural sense, it can be true that “x means y” even though x obtains when y is not the case. Thus our speaker might indeed have meant that you should bring more whisky, when in reality you should not: his meaning it, in nonnatural sense, does not make it so.
In Grice?s opinion, nonnatural meaning is used to induce some bel ief in hearer. More than that, it is used to induce the belief by getting the addressee to recognize the intention to induce a belief: in meaning something, then speaker does not merely cause the hearer to have a belief, he/she overtly gives the speaker a reason to believe, the reason being that he/she wants the speaker to believe. Thus what a person means, in the nonnatural sense, comes down to his/her complex mental states, especially intentions.
2、关于听话人，说话人The Speaker and the Listener
To ensure smooth communication between the speaker and the listener, it is important to nail down the role of them and the interaction between them. Some basic linguistics theory, such as Speech Act Theory, the Cooperative Principle, Conversational Implicatures, the Politeness Principle, atc. will help learners to well understand the role of the speaker and
the listener.
Speech act is actions performed via utterances. In English, it is commonly given more specific labels, such as apology, complaint, compliment, invitation, promise, or request. These descriptive terms for different kinds of speech acts apply to the speaker's communicative intention in producing an utterance. The speaker normally expects that his or her communicative intention will be recognized by the hearer. Both speaker and hearer are usually helped in this process by the circumstances surrounding the utterance.
We know that quite often a speaker can mean a lot more than what is said. The problem is to explain how the speaker can manage to convey more than what is said and how the hearer can arrive at the speaker?s meaning. H. P. Grice believes that there must be some mechanisms governing the production and comprehension of these utterances. He suggests that there is a set of assumptions guiding the conduct of conversation. This is what he calls the Cooperative Principle (CP).
According to Grice, conversational implicatures can arise from either strictly and directly observing or deliberately and openly flouting the maxims, that is, speakers can produce implicatures in two ways: observance and non-observance of the maxims. The least interesting case is when speakers directly observe the maxims so as to generate conversational implicatures. If the hearer wants to accurately export the conversational implicatures, he or she should know something about the the following aspects: 1）conventionality implicatures of the utterance; 2）cooperative principle and criteria; 3）the context of the utterance; 4）some common background knowledge of the speaker and the listener.
In most cases, the indirectness is motivated by considerations of politeness. Politeness is usually regarded by most pragmatists as a means or strategy which is used by a speaker to achieve various purposes, such as saving face, establishing and maintaining harmonious social relations in conversation, thus to promote better communication between the speaker and the listener.
3、句义，词义，话语意义，命题意义，篇章意义
从哲学方面以及语言学方面对其进行分析；它们在不同语境中状态；结合法律举例
1) Word meaning
Word is a unit of expression that has universal intuitive recognition by native speakers, whether it is expressed in spoken or written form.
Sense and reference are two terms often encountered in the study of word meaning. They are two related but different aspects of meaning. Sense is concerned with the inherent meaning of the linguistic form. It is the collection of all the features of the linguistic form: it is abstract and de-contextualized. Reference means what a linguistic form refers to in the real physical world; it deals with the relationship between the linguistic element and the non-linguistic world of experience. Obviously, linguistic forms having the same sense may have different references in different situations. On the other hand, there are also occasions, when linguistic forms with the same reference might differ in sense. A very good example is the two expressions “morning star” and “evening star”. These two differ in sense but as a matter of fact, what they refer to is the same: the very same star that we see in the sky.
According to Wittegenstein, words like tools, the meaning of word depends on the usage of the word. In another word, the meaning of word depends on the function of the word. The meaning of a word rests with the usage of the word in a language. Words are different tools in language. These tools are characterized by their usage. Sometimes, he did not see words as tools, however, he said directly: languages are tools. The different concepts in language are different tools.
2) Sentence Meaning:
(句子意义是构成句子的词汇意义和结构意义共同作用的结果)
The meaning of a sentence is often studied as the abstract, intrinsic property of the sentence itself in terms of predication. It is obvious that the sentence meaning is connected with the meaning of the words which constitute the sentence; but it is still clear that the sentence meaning is not the totality of the meanings of the component words because the syntactical structure of the sentence also plays a role in determining the sentence meaning. That is to say, the meaning of a sentence is a product of both lexical and grammatical meaning. Lexical meaning is the de-contextual denotation of the words which is defined in the dictionary, while the grammatical meaning is abstract meaning represented by the grammatical structures of the words. Semantic relations:
(句子之间的关系：同义，反义，蕴含)
Synonymy: the sameness in meaning between sentences.
Antonymy: the oppositeness in meaning between sentences.
eg: “Overruled.” “反对无效。”
“Sustained.” “反对有效。”
（uttered by a judge when confronting an objection of a lawyer in the court)
Entailment：A sentence entails a second sentence when the truth of the first sentence guarantees the truth of the second sentence, and the falsity of the second sentence guarantees the falsity of the first.
Linguistic Analysis:
(句子除了有字面意义外，还有在一定语境中产生的语境意义和会话含义)
Besides the combination of the lexical and grammatical meaning of the sentence, which may be called the literal meaning of sentence, there are another two kinds of sentence meaning: the contextual meaning and conversational implicature of sentences. The contextual meaning refers to the meaning attached to the intrinsic meaning of the sentence when used by people, and connected with the text, situation, cultural background, etc. The conversational implicature refers to the implied meaning of the speaker when using the sentence.
Philosophical Analysis:
Broadly speaking, the meaning of a sentence is a proposition. In truth-conditional semantics, the meaning of a sentence is obtained from and determined by the conditions under which it may be true. The linguistic philosopher G. Frege holds that a sentence has no truth value if the sentence has no clear meaning because vague meaning may result in a failure in judging the truth value. Many sentences have no truth value at all, but they still have meaning. The meaning of such sentences is largely determined by their conditions of use rather than their truth conditions. Any question, e.g., …Which evidence will prevail?? （哪样证据会被采信？）lacks a direct connection to a set of truth conditions. Even though the sentences …The accused is acquittal. ? and …The accused is found innocent. ? have the same truth conditions, they have very different situations of use.
3) Proposition and proposition meaning
(1) Proposition: usually defined as the content or meaning expressed by a sentence; the relationship between a sentence and a proposition can be seen as the expression and the expressed. Generally, the sentences are declarative sentences that make some kind of judgments that is beyond the capability of questions, imperatives or excalmatives. Additionally, a sentence that conveys no meanings can never be called a proposition.
(2) Proposition meaning: the truth value of a proposition.
In semantics, the value of a proposition is typically studied in the field of truth-conditional semantics. In truth-conditional semantics, the recognized way to figure out the meaning of a sentence (or a proposition) is to find out the conditions under whi ch it may be true. The famous example incited by the famous linguist Tarski is: “…Snow is white? is true iff snow is white” in which “iff” stands for “if and only if”. And he summarized the regularity for such propositions to be true as “S is true iff p” a nd p stands for the set of conditions that fit for all sentences.
(3)Linguistically, a proposition is a sentence that is endowed with the truth value. Sometimes, a proposition can be expressed by different sentences. For example:
a) The interpretation of these Regulations shall be vested in the Ministry of Finance.
b) These Regulations shall be interpreted by the Ministry of Finance.
These two sentences both speculate the proposition that “the Regulations will be interpreted by the Ministry of Financ e” though clearly they are two distinct sentences.
And sometimes, the same sentence can express different propositions when referred to in different times, or by different speakers. For instance:
c) 乙方为甲方培养四个实验室的工作人员。
In this statement, we can say that “Pa rty B will train four workers for the library of Party A(乙方为甲方的实验室培养四个工作人员)” or that “Party B will train workers for the four libraries of Party A（乙方为甲方的四个实验室培养工作人员）”.
(4)Philosophically, the truth value of proposition is usually described or analyzed through syllogism. For instance:
d) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. So Socrates is mortal.
In philosophy, there are generally five logical connectives to connect the different propositions in a certain context: conjunction (and, written as &/∧), disjunction (or, written as∨), implication (if…then, written as →), equivalence ( if and only if, written as ←→) and negation ( not, written as ～). In the field of linguistic philosophy, the truth value of a proposition can vary according to different interpretations.
4) Utterance and utterance meaning
(1)Utterance: In my point of view, the langue and parole shall be mentioned before the utterance is discussed. Generally speaking, utterance does not have a precise linguistic definition. Phonetically an utterance is a unit of speech bounded by silence. In dialogue, each turn by a speaker may be considered an utterance. To some degree, the “utterance” does not mean words, sentences, or even the texts. Sometimes, even an intonation or a gestures will have their implied meanings.
(2) Utterance meaning:
In semantics, we know even the word “mean" has different meanings. As is known to us, one utterance or expression has more than one meaning except its literal meaning. So in accordance with this phenomenon, the subjec t “pragmatics” has been formed. By virtue of the efforts of some linguistic experts such as Austin and Grice, they put forward some relevant theories, principles and methods to study this phenomenon, therefore the most outstanding theory (a theory of the illocutionary act) came into being. The speaker may utter out one utterance but refer to a total different thing beyond its literal meaning.
(3) Some examples:
In legal English, some expressions are quite different from daily language. Taking the word “lawyer” for example, the common people may deems it as someone whose job is to advise people about laws, write formal agreements, or represent people in court, but its meaning is quite larger than that, it also refers to those who study law or is closely related to the study of law, and so on. Now, let?s look at one more example; the word “insured”, we can find its pronunciation in the dictionary, the letter "e” is pronounced as [i], but some professionals may pronounce it as [e].
In legal English, there are also many other examples; to make a simply speaking, the utterance meaning is the meaning beyond it literal meaning. To know the deeper meaning or the implied meaning, relevant situations such as the history, culture and the legal systems shall be taken into consideration.
5) Discourse and discourse meaning
The meaning of discourse is the psychological reflection of fraction of reality formed by the interaction of the discourse and personal background in personal consciousness. There are three levels for the meaning of discourse. The first refers to the psychological reflection of fraction of reality in the sender?s consciousness in the process from reflection transfer to discourse. The second refers to the constructed meaning of discourse. And the third refers to the psychological reflection of fraction of reality formed by the interaction of discourse and the receiver?s background in the receiver?s consciousness. The meaning of discourse can be considered as the language message contained in the language sign and the message reflecting the reality directly.
The meaning of discourse is the psychological reflection of fraction of reality formed by the interaction of the discourse and personal background in personal consciousness. There are three levels for the meaning of discourse. The first refers to the psychological reflection of fraction of reality in the sender?s consciousness in the process from reflection transfer to discourse. The second refers to the constructed meaning of discourse. And the third refers to the psychological reflection of fraction of reality formed by the interaction of discourse and the receiver?s background in the receiver?s consciousness. The meaning of discourse can be considered as the language message contained in the language sign and the message reflecting the reality directly.
二、语义三角Semantic Triangle
A t h e o r y w h i c h e x p l i c i t i l y e m p l o y s t h e n o t i o n“c o n c e p t”i s t h e s e m a n t i c t r i a n g l e p r o p o s e d b y O g d e n a n d R i c h a r d i n t h e i r T h e M e a n i n g o f M e a n i n g.T h e y a r g u e t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n a w o r d a n d a t h i n g i t r e f e r s t o i s n o t d i r e c t.I t i s m e d i a t e d b y c o n c e p t.I n a d i a g r a m f o r m,t h e r e l a t i o n i s r e p r e s e n t e d a s f o l l o w s:
Concept
(Thought)
（Symbolizes）(Refers to)
Symbol ------------------ Referent
(Word) (Stands for) (Thing)
T h i s d i a g r a m i n d i c a t e s t h a t:
1) Concept(概念)/Thought(思想) is directly linked to Referent(所指物)/Thing(事物). The Concept is based on the objective things. In other words, it is the reflective image of the objective things in one?s mind. In this triangle, there i s a real line between the Concept and Referent, which shows “A Concept refers to a Thing”.
2)C o n c e p t i s a l s o d i r e c t l y l i n k e d t o S y m b o l(表意符号)/W o r d(词).T h e C o n c e p t i s r e p r e s e n t e d b y v i r t u e o f S y m b o l/W o r d.
I n o t h e r w o r d s,t h e W o r d i s u s e d t o e x p r e s s t h e C o n c e p t.A l s o a r e a l l i n e l i n k t h e C o n c e p t a n d S y m b o l/W o r d,w h i c h s h o w s “A W o r d s y m b o l i z e d a c o n c e p t”.
3)B e t w e e n S y m b o l/W o r d a n d Referent/Thing there is no direct and necessary link. That is to say the link is arbitrary and conventional. A broken line is used to connect the both, which shows “A Word stands for a Referent/Thing”.
B e c a u s e o f t h e a r b i t r a r y c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e W o r d a n d R e f e r e n t,a T h i n g c a n b e e x p r e s s e d b y d i f f e r e n t W o r d s.F o r e x a m p l e:d o g i s狗i n c h i n e s e,d o g i n e n g l i s h,h u n d i n g e r m e n a n d p e r r o i n S p a n i s h,e t c.
C o n v e n t i o n a l l y,C o n c e p t i s t h e m e d i a t o l i n k t h e W o r d a n d R e f e r e n t.T h e s o-c a l l e d M e a n i n g i s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n W o r d a n d R e f e r e n t.B e f o r e e s t a b l i s h i n g a f o r e s a i d r e l a t i o n s h i p,t h e r e m u s t b e a C o n c e p t w h i c h i s c o n v e n t i o n a l a n d u n d e r s t a n d a b l e i n t h e m i n d s o f t h e s p e a k e r a n d h e a r e r.B a s e d o n t h i s,t h e h e a r e r c a n s e e w h a t t h e s p e a k e r m e a n s.
三、涵义与指称(On Sense and Reference)
Outline of On Sense and Reference
ⅠThe regular connexion between a sign, its sense, and its reference
(Ⅰ)A proper name (word, sign, sign combination, expression) expresses its sense, stands for or designates its reference. By means of a sign we express its sense and designate its reference.
(Ⅱ)Usually, a sign corresponds a definite sense and a sense in turn corresponds a definite reference, while a given reference (an object) does not belong only a single sign. The same sense has different expressions in different languages or even in the same language. But exceptions to this regular behavior often occur because natural languages do not always satisfy this condition. e. g The words …the celestial body most distant from the Earth? have a sense, but it is very doubtful if they also have a reference. The expression …the least rapidly convergent series? has a sense but demonstrably has no reference, since for every given convergent series, another convergent, but less rapidly convergent, series can be found.
(Ⅲ) The reference and sense of a sign are to be distinguished from the associated idea. The reference of a proper name is the object itself which we designate by its means; the idea, which we have in that case, is wholly subjective; in between lies the sense, which is indeed no longer subjective like the idea, but is yet not the object itself.
ⅡThe relationship between a reference, its truth value, and a thought (take subordinate clause as an example) (Ⅰ)The subordinate clause usually has for its sense not a thought, but only a part of one, and consequently no truth value as reference. It may happen, however, that the sense of the subsidiary clause is a complete thought, in which case it can be replaced by another of the same truth value without harm to the truth of the whole-provided there are no grammatical obstacles.
(Ⅱ) A subordinate clause may not always be replaced by another of equal truth value without harm to the truth of the whole sentence structure. The reasons are as follows:
(1)When the subordinate clause does not stand for a truth value, inasmuch as it expresses only a part of a thought;
(2)When the subordinate clause does stand for a truth value but is not restricted to so doing, insomuch as its sense includes
one thought and part of another.
Ⅲ Make a conclusion of this paper with a formula
a = a and a =
b are statements of differing cognitive value. If now a = b, then indeed the reference of …b? is the same as th at of …a?, and hence the truth value of …a = b? is the same as that of …a = a?. In spite of this, the sense of …b? may differ from that of …a?, and thereby the thought expressed in …a = b? differs from that of …a = a?.
四、语义明晰化与语义模糊性
1）语义模糊的概念
模糊语义学是近年来兴起的一门新学科，它建立在多值逻辑学之上，讨论自然语言的语义模糊性，主要研究具有模糊性质的词句的意义。美国实用主义和符号学的创始人、著名哲学家皮尔斯认为：“当事物出现几种可能状态时，尽管说话者对这些状态进行了仔细的思考，实际上仍不能确定是把这些状态排除出某个命题还是归属于这个命题，这时候，这个命题就是模糊的。上面说的实际上不能确定，我们指的并不是由于解释者的无知而不能确定，而是因为说话者的语言特点就是模糊的。”（Ballmer & Pinkal, 1983:2）
语言的模糊性是普遍存在的。早在1957年英国著名的语言学家琼斯(D.Jones)就开始察觉到语言的模糊性质。他说“:我们大家(包括那些追求精确无误的人),在说话和写作时常常使用不精确的,含糊的,难以下定义的术语和原则。这并不妨碍我们所用的词是非常有用的,……通常人们尽管使用不精确的表达和难于下定义的术语,但仍能相互理解。”1965年,美国电机工程和计算机科学家扎德教授(L.A.Zadeh)在美国《信息与控制》(Information and Control)杂志发表了题为《模糊集》(Fuzzy Sets)的文章,提出了模糊理论。他指出:现实的物体类别之间经常没有确定的界限,这种被称为“模糊集”的现象,表明了人类的认识能力具有一种模糊的特性。它们的存在,对人们的抽象思维和信息传递都有至关重要的作用。语言学界在扎德模糊理论的启发下认识到:模糊属性同样地不可分离地存在于人类的自然语言之中。
我国学者伍铁平（1999），张乔（1998），秦秀白（1984），何自然（1988）等也从不同的角度对语言、语义、语用模糊作出了各自的理解和论述，他们的研究都对我国模糊语义理论作出了重要的贡献。这些论述从不同侧面揭示出了模糊性的特征和实质，加深了我们对语义模糊性的认识。所谓语义的模糊性（fuzziness）, 是指语义所表现出来的一种语义不确定、界限不分明、亦此亦彼的性质，归根到底就是人们认识中关于对象类属边界和性态的不确定性在语言中的反映, 它是作为思维物质外壳的语言的特征。
German linguist Anton Marty gave a profound understanding of the vagueness ( 注：此处用的是vagueness，但从其定义来看，应该指的是fuzziness) of language by saying, “vagueness is such a kind of phenomenon, that is, the field of application of cer tain names is not strictly outlined”.
2）语义模糊现象的成因
客观原因：客观世界中的许多事物、现象、特征等组成了一个连续体，这就很难在它们之间划一个确切的界限。世界具有移动性、不可分性和连续体性。这种客观世界的不可分性和连续体性，导致了范畴边界的模糊性，表示这些范畴的词语具有模糊性也就在所难免。大千世界错综复杂、变化多端，客观外界充满了复杂性、模糊性，这就决定了思维和认识的复杂性和模糊性，从而形成了语言的模糊性。例如，世界上五彩缤纷的颜色就构成一个连续统，不同色彩的本质差异体现为光波波长的差异，而光波波长的长短差异是连续的、渐变的。当人们用语言来表达这些难以切分的、连续的事物时，就会出现符号的所指边界不明的情况。既然自然界的颜色是一种模糊现象，语言中标志各种颜色的词也只能是模糊词。
主观原因：从辩证唯物论的观点看，模糊性根植于事物的普遍联系和发展变化这一根本属性，根植于差异的中间过渡性，本质上是客观的。但是，客体的模糊性只是语义模糊性产生的条件，如果没有人的认识活动，语义的模糊性也不会产生。模糊认识是人类不确定认识的基本形式和本质特征，关于人类认识过程中形成的语义模糊一般有以下几个原因：
首先，由于人的认识能力的局限性，使人类在把握对象的类属和性态时缺乏明晰的界限或精确的划分，由此而产生语义模糊性。客观事物本身是无限的，而人们的主观认识能力是有限的。人类对客观世界及自身的认识尽管从整个发展历史来看是日趋深入的，但在不同的发展阶段却存在着一定的局限性，这种认识上的局限性必然带来某种语义模糊性。
其次，人类在认知世界和进行范畴划分时，还必须遵循“经济原则”。“认知经济原则”和“语言经济原则”都是我们社会生活中必不可少的最基本准则。对于人类来说，在不影响思维的前提下，一个概念所能覆盖和储存的信息越多越好，所需要的概念越少越好，这就符合认知经济原则。这种认知经济原则就决定了语言表达的经济性原则。因
此，认知经济原则和语言经济原则就必然导致范畴语义的模糊性和词语语义的模糊性。
另外，人类的隐喻认知系统，使得人类在认识事物时，会将客观事物的界限变得模糊起来。
语言原因：客观外界具有连续体性质，人类思维和表达思维的语言必然会具有模糊性现象。从语言系统的角度看，语言的意义反映人们对客观事物的认识，客观事物的无穷与语言形式的有限这一矛盾，要求语言使用者要考虑经济性原则，即以最少量的符号传递最大限度的信息，也就需要语言具有高度概括性和模糊性。从语言的功能看，人们之间言语交际的需要也是语义模糊性产生的原因。社会交际是语言的本质功能，交际需要语言表达的模糊性。由语境引起的模糊性在日常语言中并不少见，一些本身不模糊的词语，在具体语境中能获得模糊的意义。人类在给事物命名时由于认识上的局限，往往会抓住事物的某一特征，而忽略或未能弄清事物的其它特征，这就会将客观世界中原本界限分明的物体，弄得模糊起来。
语义模糊性的产生
1）从语言表达的客体来看：许许多多的事物都存在着不同程度的模糊性。模糊性主要出现在连续系统的两端边缘部分，也就是事物性态转变过程中的中介地带。模糊理论的创始人扎德发现，“在现实世界中所遇的客休经常投有规定的界限”，存在着“不能精确划定的类别”。他于1965年发表了著名的(模糊集合》(Fuzzy Seta), 把客体性态和类属的不确定性称之为模糊性。
2）从使用语言的主体来看：人作为认识的主体，在认识客休形成概念这一认识过程中存在着模糊性。宇宙万物的无限性决定了认识的无终极性。因此，人对客观事物的实际认识和理解与语义模糊的产生休戚相关。语音主体人的认识不精确成为语言模糊的必然，语言是认识的表达方式认识的模糊性必然决定语言使用中的模糊。
3）从语言本身来看：自然语言的模糊性是客观存在的。模糊性是自然语言的一个重要特征。语言是音、义结合的符号系统，由语音、词汇、语法三大要素组成。语言模糊就产生于这三个方面的不清晰和不明确。
3）语义模糊的基本特征
（1）语义模糊的普遍性和客观性
客观外界有许多事物在性态和类属方面具有亦此亦彼性，反映和表达事物的词语也就会具有亦此亦彼性。再加之人们在认识精确的客观事物时，也会具有一定的模糊性，这就使得模糊现象在语言中普遍存在，这是自然语言自身的一大特点，是语义客观存在的主要性质之一，也是区别于人工语言、数理语言的显著特征。全世界所有语言都存在模糊性特点。思维离不开模糊性，表达离不开模糊性，生活中的模糊性无处不在，常见得以至于我们并没有明显感到它的存在。比如医生在给病人透露不好消息时，政客们在讨论敏感问题时，外交家们在谈论国际大事时，无不施展含糊其词的本事，其言谈辞令渗透在迂回曲折的词语之中。
（2）语义模糊的不确定性
不确定性是针对确定性而言的。所谓确定性是指事物稳定的特征。所谓不确定性，是指事物不稳定的特征。模糊语义的不确定性既包括内涵义的不确定性，也包括外延义的不确定性。内涵不确定性是指没有绝对的、统一的标准可以用来确定词语所指对象范围。例如，日常用语中的颜色词“红”，其内涵就具有不确定性，《现代汉语词典》，(修订版) (p.520)对它没有下完整的定义，只是说：“像鲜血或石榴花的颜色”。严格地说这不是“红”的内涵，只是识别“红”的参照标准，这本身具有不确定性。模糊语义的外延不确定性是指词语的所指对象范围没有明确的边界，在实际应用中，对有些对象是否属于模糊词语所指的范围人们把握不准。例如，“青年”是个模糊词，其外延具有不确定性。这表现在，对于有些对象是否属于“青年”的范围把握不准，年龄小于25岁的人都可以算作“青年”，但对于年龄为35岁或36岁或37岁的人是否属于“青年”就拿不准，“青年”和“中年”之间很难划清界线。外延和内涵具有密切的联系。内涵为外延的确定提供一个标准、尺度。如果一个概念的内涵所提供的标准、尺度本身具有不确定性，那么这个概念的所指对象(也即外延)就具有不确定性。反之，外延的不确定性，可以反证内涵的不确定性。
（3）语义模糊的相对性
语义模糊的相对性是指语义模糊的地方不是绝对地模糊，它本身不具有独立性，总是依赖于语义的清晰性、确定性而存在。语义模糊的相对性是指语义不确定的地方和明晰的地方相对而言，并非语义模糊一团、杂乱无章。语义模糊的相对性也指一个语言单位的语义的模糊性的大小是和与它在语义上相关的语言单位的语义的精确性、模糊性相比较而言的。例如“珠穆朗玛峰高8848米”和“珠穆朗玛峰高8800多米”相比，前者是精确的，后者是模糊的，但后者若与“珠穆朗玛峰高8000多米”或“珠穆朗玛峰很高很高”等相比，其语义又精确得多了。
（4）语义模糊的交际性和实用性
有不少人认为语言越精确越好，其实这是一个极大的误解。在人们各种语言交际中，既需要精确词语（如科学实验数据），也需要模糊词语。即使在很多正式协议中也是如此，两种类型的词语都有。何自然（1990）指出，应
该精确时含糊不得，应该含糊时就得含糊。
模糊词语往往为各层人士所乐于使用。模棱两可的词句既能作这样的解释，也可以作另外一种相反的说明，语义具有较大的灵活性、开放性，既不会留人以把柄，又给自己留下后路。模糊词语本身就具有很好的交际性，在须用模糊词语的地方若用了精确词语，反而显得不伦不类，令人发笑。含糊在语用上有其积极意义（何自然，1990）。模糊化的词语具有很高的语用价值，在很多场合需要它们。我们思维时离不开模糊性，表达时离不开模糊词语，生活中的模糊现象无处不在。正是由于语言具有模糊性，才使得语言具有弹性、生气，灵活多变，有助于我们提高交际效率。
语义模糊的基本特征
1）整体性模糊语义的整体性是指，模糊语义作为语言单位所表达的内容具有内在的结构。这种结构是由语义中心区和语义边缘区组成的，但又不是二者的简单相加。
2）不确定性不确定性是针对确定性而言的。所谓确定性是指事物稳定的特征。所谓不确定性，是指事物不稳定的特征。模糊语义的不确定性既包括内涵义的不确定性，也包括外延义的不确定性。A. 内涵不确定性。内涵不确定性是指没有绝对的、统一的标准可以用来确定词语所指对象范围。例如，日常用语中的颜色词“红”，其内涵就具有不确定性。B. 外延不确定性。模糊语义的外延不确定性是指词语的所指对象范围没有明确的边界，在实际应用中，对有些对象是否属于模糊词语所指的范围人们把握不准。例如“，青年”是个模糊词，其外延具有不确定性。这表现在，对于有些对象是否属于“青年”的范围把握不准，年龄小于56 岁的人都可以算作“青年”，但对于年龄为76岁或78 岁或79 岁的人是否属于“青年”就拿不准“，青年”和“中年”之间很难划清界线。
3）相对性模糊语义的相对性是指语义模糊的地方不是绝对地模糊，它本身不具有独立性，总是依赖于语义的清晰性、确定性而存在。模糊语义的相对性又分为内涵义的相对性和外延义的相对性。模糊语言单位，如模糊词和模糊词组，它所表达的理性概念的内核总是确定的、明晰的。这种确定性、清晰性直接对应于人们的经验和认识的明确性，间接地反映了客观事物的稳定的状态和确定的属性。
4）程度性既然模糊语义具有相对性，那么，同时它的分布就应具有程度上的差别。这种差别存在于人们的语感中。
5）不可取消性模糊语义的不可取消性是指模糊语言表达式的模糊性是它所指谓的概念结构本身固有的属性，不会随着语境的增加而消失。
语义模糊的表现形式
语义模糊现象多产生于同属于一个语义场的下义词项之间。同属子一个语义场的下义词之间易产生语义模糊的现象，是因为每个下义词之间是有层次逐渐递进或递减的，它们之间形成一个过渡地带，存在“亦此亦彼”“似是非是”的现象，即为模糊性。
1）上下义关系场语言中的某些词可以在一个共同概念的支配下组成一个语义场，因此就有了类属范畴型语义场。如在年龄场中的各个义词：儿童、少年、青年、中年、老年，对年龄的区段表示就具有模糊性，产生了诸如少年儿童、青少年、中青年、壮年此类的相交融的语义模糊。
2）反义关系场语义都有对立性，许多成对反义词所表示的二项对比都表示一种“极性对立”。可以有词义矛盾对立，即非此即彼的语义场；也可有只表示两个“极端”词义，具有递进或者递减程度上不同的语义场，如dead/alive的极性对立，非死即活，反之亦然。而两极对立的beautiful/ugly之间，可插入pretty, good-looking, plain-looking, disagreeable等不同程度的美、丑。这种渐进性和阶梯性概述了事物两极对立之间程度上的过渡段，在反义关系语义场中产生语义模糊。
3）相对义关系场相对关系的词语在语义上具有相对的含义，它表示一种“含蓄”的、“内涵”性的关系。如sell/buy和husband/wife，一方的出现就会暗示还有另一方。这种相对义关系的词语明显标识了一种语义上的强相对关系。但就事物发展的无限性和认识的无终极性来看，这种语义关系在外延上已有延伸。这种强相对关系的弱化，使相对义关系的词项间出现了语义模糊。
4）语义模糊与语义精确的关系
语义模糊是客观事物或现象在人们意识中模糊的反映，客观世界有许多的事物，我们通过感觉器官直接观察或采取各种手段、方式或方法，可以对它们进行测量、计算、推理、验证，全面、深刻、准确地认识它们的特点和性质，能准确地反映这些客观事物的特点、性质的词语，它们的语义就是精确义。辨证唯物主义认为，客观世界是由无数相互联系、相互制约、相互作用的事物形成的矛盾统一体，语言中的精确性与模糊性也是如此，作为矛盾对立的双方，既互相矛盾，又互相依存。从存在的条件看，总是相对而言的，没有语义精确就没有语义模糊，同样的，
没有语义模糊也就没有语义精确。一方面，人们在现实的交际过程中，需要借助精确义来准确无误地表情达意；另一方面，在很多场合，只需模糊义就能满足人们的交际。总之，语义精确与语义模糊之间的对立统一和彼此的相互转化，保证了人们顺畅地用语言进行交流。
5）语义模糊与多义的区别
模糊语义同多义是两个性质不同的问题。多义性不是造成语言存在模糊性的原因，也不是模糊性的表现，它们各自有不同的产生原因和表现方式。具体说来，有如下两点：首先，概念意义不同。多义是指一个语言单位在不同语言环境中，具有几个性质不同的意义，也就是一个语言单位具有多个不同的义项，每个义项概括的范围都是确定的。而语义模糊则不同。语义模糊是客观事物或现象在人们头脑中的模糊反映，其中的界限是不清楚的。其次，它们产生的原因不同。多义产生的原因主要是为了减少符号的数量，减轻人们的记忆负担，符合语言的经济原则，其每个义项概括的范围都是确定的。而语义模糊，是由于人们在概括中舍弃了对象中的一些个别属性，保留它们的某些共同的一般的属性，概括的范围越广，程度越高，所形成的就越具有模糊性。
6）语义模糊与歧义的区别
研究文献给歧义下的定义不下二十种,可概括为“同一语言形式表达几种不同意义的现
象”。对于同一语言形式如能作出二义或多义明确解释时,我们就说这种语言形式具有歧义性。伍铁平等学者认为,模糊单纯指词义的模糊,与句子结构无关;而构成歧义的原因多种多样,可以是由词组及其组合引起的,也可能是由句子结构引起的。
事实上,模糊与歧义的区别是很明显的,模糊更不会产生歧义。模糊是主观有意想确定语义而不能确定,语义与语境无关;歧义则往往是外因造成的一词多义或同形异义亦或词组组合或语法结构缺陷,其不确定性表现在对几个确定对象选择时的模棱两可,但在特定的语境作用下,语义会转而明确。例如“,拘留”一词,虽然既可指刑事拘留,也可指治安行政拘留,似乎容易引起歧义,但在不同的规则领域,即在不同的法律语境下,其所表达的概念是清晰的,语义不清现象会自然消除。这一点同样适合区分歧义与含糊。
7）语义模糊与含糊的区别
张乔把“含糊”简单定义为“一个有多种语义解释的词语或句子”。换句话说,当人们无论如何不能对某个命题的所指给出确定的答案时,我们就说该命题是含糊的或含糊不清的。
“模糊”与“含糊”之间有着本质的区别。模糊性是概念所指边界的不确定性,一般是语言使用者不得已而有意为之,既有消极的效应,也有积极的作用;含混不清则是因为运用语言不当致使所提供的信息缺损,是应该尽量避免的消极结果。“模糊性”是语言的一种固有属性,客观地存在于语言之中;“含混”则不是语言的固有属性。
欧美语言学家多用“vagueness(含混)”泛指语言中的各种不良现象,实质是混淆了“模糊”与“含糊不清”的界限。国内也有相当一部分专家学者不能正确处理“模糊”与“含糊”的关系。谢晖在《法律的意义追问———诠释学视野中的法哲学》一书中是这样表述的“:语言的模糊性是指语言的意义不确定性,而语言的含糊性就是指语言意义的冲突性。模糊不一定带来含混和冲突,而含混必然带来模糊和不确定。语言的含混应当进行歧义排除,而语言的模糊则往往成为重要的解释工具。因此,模糊是个大概念,而相比之下,含糊则是个小概念。”以笔者看,如果“含混必然带来模糊”则科学的模糊学变得毫无意义,更没有生存的价值与可能。
8）模糊性在法律语言中的作用
(一)无法用精确词语描述事实或用精确词语无法达到预期效果时,模糊语言可以起到不可替代的作用。模糊语言能有效弥补人类语言表现力不足的缺陷,留给人们一个可供把握的空间。这种情况发生在描写人物特征的法律文书中最为常见,尤为突出的是公安机关缉拿犯罪嫌疑人的通缉令或寻找案件线索查找无名尸的启示。以查找无名尸体的启事为例:“……路旁发现一女性无名尸体,该人身高一米六五,体态微胖,肤色较黑,年龄二十岁左右,短发,圆脸,上穿红色T恤,下穿黑色短裙,无其它随身携带物……。”在这一段启事中,撰写人物一连用了“微胖”“肤色较黑”“二十岁左右”“短发”“圆脸”等数个模糊词语,形象地描述了女尸的主要特征,使人们可以准确地运用模糊性思维来进行正确的分析、认识、判断。反之,如果硬要用精确词汇进行描述,例如把“短发”改为“发长7厘米”,反而更让人难以把握,达不到预期效果。
(二)涉及国家机密时,模糊概念的运用可以防止泄密的可能性。有时法律语言的运用会涉及到国家机密,那么,在起诉书、判决书等司法文书提及时,就应该用模糊语言进行指代,而不必用精确语言对其描述。
(三)如涉及当事人隐私或其它有关社会善良风俗的事项时,应适当选用模糊词语进行表达,以体现法律的人文关怀。法律在适用过程中必须注意到法律本身对人的尊重和关怀,如在涉及强奸、猥亵、侮辱、诽谤等行为的刑事或民事案件中,必然要涉及到当事人隐私的内容。对这部分内容进行精细的描写,必然有悖于社会公共道德和社会良好
风尚,是对受害人感情的再一次刺激和对其隐私权的严重侵犯,往往会造成恶劣的影响。这时,模糊语言的使用就可以避免这种严重后果的出现。
(四)运用法律对社会关系进行规范性调整时,适当运用模糊语言作辅助,可以确保规范的周密和完备。法律一向以严谨著称,它通过确定人们的基本权利、义务来对社会关系进行调整。人们可以从法律中得到如何行为的指向,以实现社会生活的正常运转。如果法律条文涵义含糊不清、意指不明,则人们必然会进退失据,社会将陷入混乱之中。但这并不表明法律条文中不能有模糊词语的存在,而事实上在法律规范的条文中完全排除模糊词语也是不可能的。在现实生活中,已没有一部法律完全用精确词汇进行表述,更多的是确切词语与模糊词语的交替使用,确切词语为主,辅以适当模糊词语,更有利于法律规范的周密和全面。
(五)特定语境下,模糊词语的使用可以更准确地描述形势。模糊表达的基本特点就是外延界限的不清晰以及内涵的笼统概括,因此,用模糊词语进行表达有含义不确定的效果。这种含义不确定的效果有时比精确的词语对问题的明确界定有更好的作用,因为模糊语言高度的概括性和接受者的灵活性,运用模糊语言可以明确的表达表达者的意旨,又可留下广泛和充分的空间。这种情况突出地表现在公安侦察机关对犯罪嫌疑人的讯问过程中。
(六)恰当使用模糊词语,可以使法律语言简洁、凝练,重点突出。由于模糊词语的概括性较强,描述空间大,适当运用可以起到准确清晰、突出重点的效果。
9）语义模糊性的分类
根据不同的标准，语义模糊性可以从以下三个角度研究：
Posner在《法理学问题》一书中根据语境变化将法律文本分为“内部含糊”与“外部含糊”两种含糊不清的情况：前者是由于法律用语本身的歧义、模糊、评价性特征而产生的模糊；后者是由于语境因素的作用而使原本清楚的法律用语变得模糊，致使概念的外延发生变化。也就是说，内部模糊是同一社会中的不同语言共同体对同一表述的不同理解；外部模糊指同一表述在一个历史时期中被普遍认可的意义到另一时期会变更或消失。从这个角度来说，模糊立法语言的含义是动态的。
根据功能不同，Joanna Channell将模糊现象分为三类：第一类是模糊附加词；第二类是模糊词语；第三类模糊蕴含。立法语言中，常常使用“以上、以下、以内、以外、从轻、从严、轻微、严重、不满”等词语来改变模糊语义的隶属度，这些都属于模糊附加词。法律语言中，人们对同一概念所持标准不同，导致对“自由、公平、平等、合理”的理解不同，这类模糊属于模糊词语。而有的法律概念看似清晰，实质蕴含着不言自明的细枝末节，以精确形式传递模糊含义。
语义的模糊还可根据词类和语法作用进行分类。参照王逢鑫《英语模糊语法》，本文根据意义相近和语法作用相同，将立法语言的模糊语义可以归纳成不同的模糊词类：模糊形容词、模糊名词、模糊动词和模糊副词，并从定性和定量的角度进行研究，从而客观地看待法律文本，谨慎探求部分立法语言的模糊性、存在空间，理清立法语言中模糊语义的科学蕴含。
语义模糊的类型：英国语言学家坎培森曾将语义模糊分为四种类型：
1）指称模糊（designational vagueness）指称模糊是指词汇本身意义清楚，但难以确定它用于哪些客体。
2）语义不确定(independency of meaning) 类典型理论认为语义范畴不能以一套必要且充分的特征来界定，语义范畴的成员之间有程度的差异，语义范畴的边缘模糊.正由于客观的心理因素，产生语义不确定。
3）词项意义缺乏确指性（lack of specification）即一个词的外延不能从其词义或一般用法中明确断定。如年轻究竟有多年轻是25还是35岁, “run”是以怎样的速度。
4）词项确指意义的选择主要由or这个词导致，or的使用本身使我们做出不同的选择。
五、关于speech act (How to do things with words)
该本书的考点在于speech act, 大家还可以参考肖老师印的《语用学》第六章的内容
第一章：performatives and constatives
什么是performatives ?
P5 A,B两条中有规定，并可结合语用学speech act 的定义作答(见肖老师印的《语用学》P47)
第二章：conditions for happy performatives （即speech act 顺利进行的条件）
What are the conditions?
P15----A1,A2,B1,B2,г1,г2 (对于这几条的理解可以参照P18 上面那个图标)，还可以参照《语用学》P50 felicity conditions 作答。
第三章infelicities: misfires
本章主要讲①违反A1，A2, B1，B2 的区别
A1: P27 “If somebody……”这一段有解释
A2：P29 “(2)”有解释
B1, B2: P36
第四章Infelicities: Abuses
定义：Infelicity means that ①the speaker is insincere when uttering a sentence; ②the performance is unhappy. For example, if I “condole with you” but I did not really sympathize with you. In this circumstance, it is not void, but insincere. The unhappiness is the same.
1) Entailment:An entailment is something that logically follows from what is asserted in the utterance. “All men blush” entails “some men blush”. And if p entails q then ～q entails ～p. For example, if “the cat is on the mat” entails “the mat is under the cat” then “the mat is not under the cat” entails that “the cat is not on the mat”.
2) Implies: My saying that “the cat is on the mat” implies that I believe it is. It is not possible that I say “the cat is on the mat” along with saying “I do not believe that it is”. That is the assertion implies a belief.
3) Presupposes: Presupposes mean that the speaker assumes to be the case prior to making an utterance. For example, “All Jack?s children are bald” presup poses that Jack has some children. It should be noticed that ①If I did say “the cat is on the mat” but I do not believe that the cat is on the mat, then clearly it is a case of insincerity. In other words, the unhappine ss here is, though affecting a statem ent, exactly the same as the unhappiness infecting “I promise” when I do not believe. ②If I say ”John?s children are all bald” while in fact John has no children, then the utterance is void. ③It might be that in entailment, one preposition entails another is not unlike the way “I promise” entails “I ought”. It is not the same, but it is paralles: “I promise but I ought not” is parallel to “it is and it is not”. This is a self-stultifying procedure.
One assertion commits us to another assertion, one performance to another performance. Moreover, just as if p entails q then ～q entails ～p, so "I ought not” entails “I do not promise”.
In conclusion, to explain what can go wrong with statements, we cannot just concentrate on the proposition involved, we must consider the situation in which the utterance is issued.
第五章. Possible Criteria of Performatives
The distinction between the constative and the performative is that the constative utterance is true or false and the performative is happy of unhappy. However, it should be noticed that consideration of the happiness and unhappiness type may infect statements and consideration of the type of truth and falsity may infect performatives.
Typical performatives are which have words in the first person singular present indicative active. This is called explict performative. However, person and voice are not essential to a performative utterance. For this, we can see another common and important type of performance which has the verb in the second or third person (singular or plural) and the verb in the passive voice.
To judge whether an utterance is performative or not, “hereby” is a useful criterion, that is, if “hereby” can be inserted in the sentence, then the utterance can be judged to be performative. Moreover, mood and tense also can be the criteria, but they are not absolute.
第六章. Explicit Performatives
Explicit performatives use first person, singular subject, simple present tense, indicative mood, active voice and performative verbs. However, the performative is not obviously distinct from the constative, then it is necessary to consider how to define the performance more clearly. The suggestion is that we might
1) make a list of all verbs with performative-looking peculiarity;
2) suppose that all performative utterances not in preferred form could be reduced to the form and so rendered what we may call explicit performatives.
The device of the explicit performative:
1. Mood.
There are two forms: imperative mood and using auxiliaries.
2. Tone of voice, cadence and emphasis.
Tone of voice, cadence and emphasis can be conveyed by the use of an exclamation mark and a question mark. Punctuation, italics and word order may help, but they are rather crude.
3. Adverbs and adverbial phrases
For example, we can qualify the force of “I shall” by adding “probably” or by adding “without fail”.
4. Connecting particles
We may use the particle “still” with the force of “I insist that” and use “therefore” with the force of “I conclude that”… There are also other essential devices by which the force of the utterance is got across.
5. Accompaniments of the utterance
We may accompany the utterance of the words by gestures (winks, pointings, etc.) or by ceremonial non-verbal actions. These may sometimes serve without the utterance of any words, and their importance is very obvious.
6. The circumstances of the utterance
The trouble about all these devices has been principally their vagueness of meaning and uncertainty of sure reception, but there is also probably some positive inadequacy in them for dealing with anything like the complexity of the field of actions which we perform with words.
第八章Locutionary, Illocutionary, and Perlocutionary Acts
locutionary act 言内行为
illocutionary act 言外行为
perlocutionary act 言后行为
locutionary act: is the saying of something which is meaningful and can be understood.言内行为是指语句有意义且能为人们所理解。/ is the act of uttering words, phrases, clauses. It is the act of conveying literal meaning by means of syntax, lexicon and phonology. 言内行为就是发出词、短语、从句的动作。它是通过句法、词汇和音位学的方式来传达字面意义的行为。
Illocutionary act: is using a sentence to perform a function.借句子执行一个功能。/ is the act of expressing the speaker?s intention; it is the act in saying something. 言外行为是表达言者的意图的行为，是在说话的过程中执行的动作。Perlocutionary act: is the results or effects that are produced by means of saying something. 言后行为是通过说话而产生的结果或影响。It is the consequence of, or the change brought about by the utterance; it is the act performed by saying something.言后行为是由话语所引起的后果或变化；是由说某事而执行的动作。
For example: Shoot the wolf.
1. Shoot , the，wolf字面意义-----言内行为locutionary act
如果听者理解shoot, the, wolf这三个词，并且知道所指的具体的狼，那么它就是言内行为.
2. shoot the wolf，如果可以用做一个命令或劝告-----言外行为illocutionary act
3. 开了枪------言后行为perlocutionary act
“/performing/ a locutionary act ... is roughly equivalent to uttering a certain sentence with a certain sense and reference, which is again equivalent to meaning in the traditional sense. Second, we said that we also perform illocutionary acts such as informing, ordering, warning, undertaking, etc., i.e. utterances which have a certain conventional force. Thirdly, we may also perform perlocutionary acts: what we bring about or achieve by saying something, such as convincing, persuading, deterring and even, say, surprising or misleading”. (Austin)
第九章Distinctions between Illocutionary and Perlocutionary Acts
Perlocutionary acts refer to the relation between the utterance and its causal effects on the addressee. In contrast, illocutionary and locutionary acts are alternative descriptions of the utterance. (See Page116)
第十章“in saying”, v.“by saying”
According to Austin?s new model, a speaker might be performing three acts simultaneously when speaking: locutionary act, illocutionary act and perlocutionary act.
The locutionary act----an act of saying something, i.e. an act of making a meaningful utterance (literal meaning of an utterance);
The illocutionary act----an act performed in saying something: in saying X, I was doing Y (the intention of the speaker while speaking).
The perlocutionary act----an act performed as a result of saying something: by saying X and doing Y, I did Z.
For example,“It is cold in here.”
Its locutionary act is the saying of it with its literal meaning the weather is clod in here;
Its illocutionary act can be a request of the hear to shut the window;
Its perlocutionary act can be the hearer?s shutting the window or his refusal to comply with the request.
第十一章statements, performatives, and illocutionary force
陈述句，施为句，言外之意
One Definition: Illocutionary Force
The illocutionary force of an utterance is the speaker's intention in producing that utterance. An illocutionary act is an instance of a culturally-defined speech act type, characterised by a particular illocutionary force; for example, promising, advising, warning, ..
Thus, if a speaker asks How's that salad doing? Is it ready yet?" as a way of ("politely") enquiring about the salad, his/her intent may be in fact to make the waiter bring the salad. Thus the illocutionary force of the utterance is not an inquiry about the progress of salad construction, but a demand that the salad be brought.
Another definition:
Illocutionary force is the combination of the particular presuppositions and attitudes that must accompany that point, including the strength of the illocutionary point, preparatory conditions, mode of achievement, sincerity conditions, and strength of sincerity conditions.
Illocutionary force distinguishes the following types of acts:
Asserting Promising Excommunicating Exclaiming in pain Inquiring Ordering
第十二章Classes of Illocutionary Force言外行为的分类
1. Verdictives：A Verdictive is a judicial act as distinct from legislative or executive acts,which are both exercitives.
2.Exercitives: An Exercitive is the giving of a decision in favour of or against a certain course of action,or advocacy of it. it is a decision that sth is to be so ,as distinct from a judgement that it is so: it is advocacy that it should be so ,as opposed to an estimate that it is so;it is an award as opposed to an assessment;it is a sentence as opposed to a verdict.
https://www.doczj.com/doc/3b9885239.html,missives: the whole point of a commissive is to commit the speaker to a certain course of action.
4.Behabitives：Behabitives include the notion of reaction to other people?s behaviour and fortunes and o f attitudes and expressions of attitudes to someone else?s past conduct or imminent conduct.
5.Expositives:Expositives are used in acts of exposition involving the expounding of views,the conducting of arguments, and the clarifying of usages and of references.
六、法律解释，从法与语言的关系方面论述（Legal hermeneutics）
1）Relevant essays
James Farr's "The Americanization of Hermeneutics: Francis Lieber's Legal and Political Hermeneutics " [1990]
Ken Kress's "Legal Indeterminacy and Legitimacy" [1989]
Michael J. Perry's "Why Constitutional Theory Matters to Constitutional Practice (And Vice Versa)" [Summer 1989]
The contributors of these three essays exhibited these virtues and their sustained commitment to Legal Hermeneutics.
2）Legal Hermeneutics
Legal hermeneutics is, then, in reality no special case but is, on the contrary, fitted to restore the full scope of the hermeneutical problem and so to retrieve the former unity of hermeneutics, in which jurist and theologian meet the student of the humanities .
Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method
Hermeneutics is a term open to several possible interpretations.[6]Legal Hermeneutics does not presuppose any single or dogmatic conception of hermeneutics, though readers will find that the philosophical hermeneutics, which Gadamer figures prominently in many of the following essays, is an attempt to identify the irreducible conditions of human understanding. Gadamer has often emphasized that his purpose is not to develop a set of rules or procedures for the interpretation of texts. His objective is philosophic, to identify "not what we do or what we ought to do (in interpretation), but what happens to us
over and above our wanting and doing."[8] Thus, philosophical hermeneutics sets for itself an ontological task, namely, that of accounting for the ineluctable relationships between text and reader, past and present, that allow for understanding to occur in the first places.
There is also a demystifying dimension to legal hermeneutics. Law, after all, purports to be a rule-governed activity. It is sometimes said that formal rules and legal doctrine provide the certainty and stability necessary for civil society. Hermeneutics seeks to disrupt this formalistic view of law. A hermeneutics of law would not seek to resolve disputes and long-standing controversies but would begin more modestly "by detaching the thing in question from its dogmatic contexts, the fixed or institutionalized ways of thinking it."
3）Purpose of Legal Hermeneutics
One purpose of Legal Hermeneutics is to situate contemporary debates on legal interpretation within the broader framework of interpretation in general. The attempt to contextualize legal theory in this way assumes that hermeneutics has something to teach jurisprudence.[3]To see the problem of reading the law in terms of law's history, the linguistic constitution of law, and the political implications of the way law is read and understood is to set legal interpretation squarely within the humanist tradition.
It is also hoped that Legal Hermeneutics offers additional evidence, if any is still needed, that borrowing from Continental philosophy to clarify legal practices does not inevitably lead to nihilism. Quite the contrary. As several of the above essays reveal, hermeneutics plays a critical role in the justification of our practical choices. Here hermeneutics helps us to see the grounds of judgment. A critical examination of how we justify our interpretive choices is a way of widening the horizons of those—perhaps especially in the law—whose practical work is so centrally interpretive.
4）What is a legal text?
What is a legal text? it is a question about the various competing textual models that have turned up in recent arguments about what the law is and how it is to be understood. This is an open-ended question. Indeed, in our current intellectual environment the textuality of the law entails a questioning of law itself.
There are, if I understand, roughly two poles of thought that can help to orient one's thinking. On the one hand there is the idea that the legal text is to be construed on the model of the logical proposition, that is, as a statement that can be judged as (in some sense) true or false according to the rules of consecutive reasoning. On the the other hand there is the idea that the legal text is always historically embedded and politically motivated, so that it is no longer possible to take the law simply as the product of reason and argument: one must also (always) construe it according to categories of materiality—power, technology, social relations, sexual difference, and so on.
5）The Principles
Hermeneutics has as its principal task the formulation of a set of elementary or general principles for interpretation and construction. To this end Lieber constructs nine "elementary principles of interpretation" and sixteen "general principles of construction." Conceived at a fairly high level of abstraction, these principles function as regulative maxims, even though they are arrayed "like a recipe in a cookery book.” As regulative maxims, these principles regulate the understanding and so make interpretation and construction possible.
① Derivative principles (at a similarly high level of abstraction) are subsequently formulated for particular texts or tasks, as in the crucial case of constitutional hermeneutics.
The elementary principles of interpretation help to systematize and correct the interpretive practices of everyday political life. These practices are inevitable because the words in utterances or texts are often ambiguous, obscure, technical, or susceptible to contextual differences. This ambiguity does not mean that the meaning—nay, the "one true meaning"—of words cannot be discovered or represented. Indeed, Lieber's very first principle states the rather lofty conviction—reminiscent of Ernesti—that words "can have but one true meaning." But it most assuredly suggests that words cannot be taken literally or at face value. It also suggests that definitions are only of provisional assistance because they, too, are composed of words susceptible to the same infirmities. "However minutely we may define, somewhere we needs must trust at last to common sense and good faith"。
② The trust we have to place in common sense and good faith is memorialized by Lieber as the second elementary principle of interpretation.
③ The third principle goes on to recognize that "words are to be taken as the utterer probably meant them to be taken." The "probably" is not a hedge on the principle itself; it is a recognition of the practical difficulties that afflict the attempt to discover and represent "what those persons who used the sign intend to convey to the mind of the beholder or hearer" 。Difficulties notwithstanding, Lieber's third principle goes to the heart of interpretation. Meaning can be understood only by the recovery of intentions. In short, Lieber argues for a strong intentionalist program in hermeneutics.
④ If, as Lieber glosses this eighth principle, the examination of the whole text "leads us to no more satisfactory result" in interpreting the meaning of a word or part of the text, then "we examine other writings, etc., of the same author or authority; if that does not suffice, we resort to contemporary writers, or declarations or laws similar to that which forms our text" (LPH, 107)—and so on.
⑤ The ninth, fifteenth, and sixteenth principles similarly reproduce their interpretive counterparts, which deal with the entire text, its spirit, and the faith we owe to it. This repetition underscores Lieber's general observation that "in many cases, interpretation and construction must closely approach to one another; but still the distinction is clear"
⑥ Where intentionality governs interpretation, analogy governs construction. Analogy or parallel reasoning, as the second and most important principle states, is the "main guide" or "primary rule" of construction; Legal constructors are also guided by the "aim" or the "causes" of a law, a point Lieber specifies in the third and fourth principles. Constructors must proceed as "closely" to the text as possible, a point intimated above. Although this process might be dictated in part by the age of the text (principle eleven) or by judgments about what can be humanly demanded (principle five), close construction is especially crucial when "the text partakes of the nature of a compact or solemn agreement" (principle seven). Constitutions are often of this sort—as is the U.S. Constitution—the close construction of which is essential to individual liberty. The twelfth principle makes this point abundantly clear.
⑦ Beyond these general principles, Lieber specifies still others that have to do with the effects or consequences of constructing a text or law in one way rather than another. the sixth and fourteenth principles give this ethical and political concreteness. The former is posed with Kantian attention to "the commonest principle of fairness" (LPH, 130): "Privileges, or favors, are to be construed so as to be least injurious to the non-privileged or unfavored." The latter invokes "mercy" in cases of doubt, especially for those who are "weak" and deserve the benefit of the doubt.
The rules and principles in this derivative hermeneutic science are of particular importance because "a constitution is to apply in every sphere of political action and hold good for many generations"
6）从法律解释学角度讲the relationship of Law and Language
（关于这个问题，我们觉得很难读懂，也不知找出的是否标准答案，所以列出以下两个版本，希望同学们理解哈。资料来源是名为Legal Hermeneutics的文档。）
(版本1)
The first thing that someone interested in hermeneutics notices about legal theory is its indifference to the questions of language that bedevil Continental thinking and poststructuralist theory. Most inquiries into the subject of law and language are precritical.
Goodrich's Reading the Law may be the first attempt at a critical and theoretical inquiry into the law that addresses the difficulties that the question of language (still an open one) poses for legal theory.
How we think of the law depends on how we think of language. The opposite has more often been true: how we think of language is frequently determined by our scientific notions of what a law is. It appears that we need to think of language as lawlike for the same reason that we need to think of the law as rational (or what we think of as rational: namely,
rule-governed) all the way down.
For the law, one can begin with the proviso that hermeneutics does not think of it in terms of the conceptual or methodological interests of the legal theorist, still less in terms of the strategic interests of legal or judicial practice; rather, the concern is with the conditions in which these interests are pursued. Put it that the interests of hermeneutics are more ontological than technical. A "hermeneutics of the law" in this respect would not be the same as a theory of the law. On the contrary, hermeneutics is apt to seem a little too wayward or free in its thinking with respect to the law (or indeed any subject). This will certainly appear the case when it comes to the question of law and language, or what in hermeneutics would be called the linguisticality (Sprachlichkeit ) of the law.
Gadamer starts this problem out with Wilhelm von Humboldt's idea that language is a web in which every culture is woven so that there is nothing that is not linguistical; but for him the web is porous, loose, open-ended, intersecting contingently with other webs. It never adds up, or reduces, to a conceptual scheme whose metaphor is that of a tightly woven fabric or network of systematically interlaced elements. Gadamer's idea is that linguisticality needs to be emancipated from "the dogmatism of the grammarians" In contrast to prison-house theorists, Gadamer insists on the unruly or anarchic nature of linguisticality. Perhaps (groping for metaphors) it would be better to say that linguisticality is structured more like the weather than like the total, overarching, linguistic, semiotic, or ideological system of the grammarians. We can make sense of the weather by studying its patterns, but only up to a point, since these patterns are more anarchic than lawlike.
法律由语言来服务，换句话说，法律的意义世界是由语言建构起来。为什么说法律的意义世界是由语言建构起来的呢?这首先取决于语言的自身功能。
语言的通知与理解的功能使得法律能够被世人知晓，语言的社会功能使得法律对整个社会的调整并形成一种秩序的状态成为可能，语言的操作功能使得人们可以理性地自觉或强制性地接受法律中权威的调整，并预测自己行为的可能法律意义(或获得权利，或承担义务甚至是责任)。语言的标记的功能使得人们可以透过法律的文本形式理解法律所传达的意义，或接受教育或引起反抗。可见，法律须臾也不能离开语言的载体，当然这种语言或是日头语，或是书面语。
Law and Language(版本2)
Gadamer
The law is a written code whose original meaning is determinable but incomplete because the code is general in its language but historical in its mode of existence and singular in its application.
Legal hermeneutics is what occurs in the give-and-take—the dialogue—between meaning and history. The historicality of the law means that its meaning is always supplemented whenever the law is understood.
The real obstacle to understanding human affairs lies in the tendency to believe that what we do—whether in building scientific theories or in concrete ethical life—admits of formulation in hard and irrevocable rules. It is precisely this claim that human life is rule-governed which brings hermeneutics ... out of its corner and into the fight. Hermeneutics pits itself against the notion that human affairs can finally be formalized into explicit rules which can or should function as decision-procedure, whether in scientific theory building or in ethics. An important part of the hermeneutics of play is to deconstruct, to undo that myth.
Wilhelm von Humboldt's idea that language is a web in which every culture is woven so that there is nothing that is not linguistical.
Gadamer's idea is that linguisticality needs to be emancipated from "the dogmatism of the grammarians". Gadamer insists on the unruly or anarchic nature of linguisticality.(linguisticality is structured more like the weather than like the total, overarching, linguistic, semiotic, or ideological system of the grammarians. )
Cavell's idea, or version of Wittgenstein's idea, is that language is not rule-governed or determined by universals, but neither is it irrational. Cavell speaks of "the fierce ambiguity of ordinary language" (180), but this ambiguity is not to be raised to the status of rule or deep structure either. Language (and understanding and knowledge) rests upon very shaky foundations—a thin net over an abyss....
The first thing that someone interested in hermeneutics notices about legal theory is its indifference to the questions of language that bedevil Continental thinking and poststructuralist theory.
Legal theory is only now making its "linguistic turn." James Boyd White's writings, which derive from ordinary language philosophy and the later Wittgenstein rather than from hard-core analytical philosophy of language, are valuable for the way they loosen up our thinking about texts and meaning. "Checking the text," where "the lawyer is engaged in a continuous argument the terms of which are always changing, in an interaction between the particular document and its larger world".
Goodrich's Reading the Law may be the first attempt at a critical and theoretical inquiry into the law that addresses the difficulties that the question of language (still an open one) poses for legal theory. How we think of the law depends on how we think of language. How we think of language is frequently determined by our scientific notions of what a law is. It
appears that we need to think of language as lawlike for the same reason that we need to think of the law as rational (or what we think of as rational: namely, rule-governed) all the way down.
Granted, Lecercle says, that language is rule-governed, a total system or system of systems immanent in its effects; but the uncanny thing about language is the way it escapes totalization, transgresses its own laws, remains irreducible to a calculus. Language that escapes its own system is called, after Jacques Lacan, lalangue. Its discourse or parole is called délire. Délire marks the borderline of the law and the legal text; it is the region of what psychoanalysts call "borderline discourse." The question is whether the law is able to seal itself off from the transgressions of its boundaries, or whether these transgressions do not belong to the deepest chambers and inner sanctum of the thing itself.
以上为阅读的
下面为可能考试出到的概念类的东西：
Unit one
Semantics: is the study of meaning in language.
Speaker meaning : is what a speaker means when he uses a piece of language(i.e. intends to convey)
Sentence meaning or word meaning: is what a sentence means(i.e. what it counts as the equivalent of in the language concerned).
Unit 2
Utterance: an utterance is any stretch of talk by a speaker on a particular occasion. (such as a sequence of sentences or a single phrase or even a single word, it is a physical event)
Sentence: a sentence is a string of words put together by the grammatical rules of a language and is a grammatically complete string of words expressing a complete thought. (neither physical event nor a physical object)
Proposition: a proposition is that part of the meaning of the utterance of a declarative sentence which describes some state of affairs.
One proposition may be conveyed by several different sentences and one sentence may be expressed by several utterances. Any thing that can be said of propositions can also be said of utterances, but not necessarily vice versa, and anything that can be said of sentences can also be said of utterances, but not necessarily vice versa.
Unit 3
Reference: reference is the relationship between language and the thing that language refers to.
Referent: the thing that language refers to.
Sense: the sense of an expression is its place in a system of semantic relationships with other expressions in the language. Relationship between reference and sense: the referent of an expression is often a thing or a person in the world; whereas the sense of an expression is not a thing at all. In fact, it is difficult to say what sort of entity the sense of an expression is. Intuitively, it is sometimes useful to think of sense as that part of the meaning of an expression that is left over when reference is factored out. It is much easier to say whether or not two expressions have the same sense. The sense of an expression is an abstraction , but it is helpful to note that it is an abstraction that can be entertained in the mind of a language user.
Unit 4
(指称语)Referring expression: a referring expression is any expression used in an utterance to refer to something or someone(or a clearly delimited collection of things or people), i.e. used with a particular referent in mind.
Unit5
Predicator：the predicator of a simple declarative sentence is the word (sometimes a group of words)which does not belong to any of the referring expressions and which, of the remainder, makes the most specific contribution to the meaning of the sentence.
Predicate: a predicate is any word(or sequence of words) which (in a given single sense) can function as the predicator of a sentence.(我个人觉得这个是一个比较抽象的)
Distinctions:“predicate”identifies elements in the language system, independently of particular example sentences. “predicator” identifies the semantic role played by a particular word in a particular sentence.
Example：a tall, handsome stranger entered the saloon.
This sentence contains one predicator, …enter?, but contains the words tall, handsome, stranger, and saloon are predicates and can function as predicators in other sentences.
Unit 8
原型理论prototype theory : a prototype of a predicate is an object which is held to be very typical of the kind of object which can be referred to by an expression containing the predicate.
典型Stereotype: s tereotype of a predicate is a list of the typical characteristics or features of things to which the predicate may be applied.
For better understanding, there is an example. A prototype of elephant is some actual elephant, whereas the stereotype of elephant is a list of characteristics which describes the prototype.
家族相似性family resemblance
意象图示image schema
概念化conceptualization
辨析：
（1）Proposition, utterance and sentence
（2）sense and reference
（3）Vagueness and ambiguity
意义的种类与分类(与law 有关的)
语义和语用之间的关系(看那篇论文)
Rights 的分析
Law and meaning
从语义学角度谈汉语中的歧义现象 摘要：语言学家普遍认为, 歧义现象是指一个句子的含义模棱两可, 可以作两种或多种解释。歧义是一种普遍的语言现象,存在于一切自然语言之中。本文尝试从语义学角度对汉语中的歧义现象进行分析，对引起歧义的各种因素进行剖析，指出歧义在实际的语言应用中的影响，并提出一些消除歧义的手段。 关键词：语义学，汉语歧义，歧义成因，消除歧义 一、文献综述 语义学是研究语言意义以及语言表达之间的意义关系的学科。语义学研究自然语言的语义特征；它把语义作为语言的一个组成部分去研究，探讨它的性质、内部结构及其变异和发展以及语义间的关系等。 “语义学”这一术语是由法国语言学家Michel Breal 在1893 年首先提出来的。1897 年,Breal 编著的《语义学探索》一书问世,标志着今天所理解的语义学开始逐步形成。1900 年,这本书被译成英文,书名为Semantics : Studies in the Science of Meaning。这本书是第一部语言语义学著作,其研究的重点在词义的历史发展方面,兼顾词汇意义和语法意义。随后，语义学的发展经历了一个曲折的过程。语义学在19 世纪末、20 世纪初开始成为一门独立的学科,50 年代逐步显露发展势头,从70 年代起才获得了充分的发展。随着越来越多的语言学家开始关注和研究语义学，发表关于语义学的著作，语义学逐渐成为一个成熟的体系。 近十年来，现代语义学呈现出多学科、跨学科、多纬度和多层次的几个显著的特点。如果说传统的语义学研究主要局限在词汇意义层次的话,现代语义学的最大特点之一是对语言意义的多层次的考察。笔者经过对近十年的文献研究发现，认知语义学和规范语义学是当代国际语义学研究的两大主流取向。认知语义学就是在认知学的框架内研究语义,对心智进行经验性的研究，它对传统形式语义学的外部缺陷有着深刻的认识，是当代一个热门的研究方向。规范语义学的核心概念是形式体系,即一种抽象的模型结构,模型的抽象性意味着广泛的语义空间,进而彰显出语义自身的自由度。从蒙塔古最初建立规范语义学到后来克里普克等人的继续发展,出现了诸如类型理论,模态理论范畴语法,博弈语义学等新的学说,特别是后来帕蒂等人对蒙塔古语义学的不断完善,充分表明了规范语义学具有极强的生命力。 而国内近十年的语义学研究也遍布了语言研究的各个方面。主要有以下几个方向：对认知语义学的研究，例如张辉的《认知语义学述评》；对框架语义学的研究，例如陶明忠、马玉蕾合著的《框架语义学———格语法的第三阶段》；语义学在对隐喻的研究中的应用，例如于莹的《认知语义学框架下的隐喻研究》；对语义学与语用学之间的关系的研究，例如康灿辉的《试论语义学与语用学的互补性》；对语义学的实际应用的研究，例如王向君的《浅谈语义学与语法教学》。而对于歧义现象的语义学研究主要是对英语中的歧义现象进行研究，例如高桂莲、陈颖、王海岩合著的《对英语歧义现象的语义分析》，却鲜有对汉语中歧义现象的语义分析。所以本文尝试从语义学角度对汉语中的歧义现象进行分析，对引起歧义的各种因素进行剖析，指出歧义在实际的语言应用中的影响，并提出一些消除歧义的手段。 二、歧义的成因 语言学家普遍认为, 歧义现象是指一个句子的含义模棱两可, 可以作两种或多种解释。语言是一种约定俗成的社会现象, 而不是人们根据科学规律创造出来的, 因此, 不论哪种语言都存在大量的歧义现象。引起歧义的原因有很多，下面笔者将对歧义的主要成因进行分类和剖析。 （一）、语音歧义 汉语中的语音歧义多是由于汉语的一个音节可以对应多个不同的语素引起的，一般存在于口语中。语音歧义主要可以分成以下三种情况。 1、同音字引起的歧义 例句：甲：“请问您贵姓？” 乙：“免贵姓zhang。” 在这个例句中，zhang既可以是“张”，也可以是“章”。在汉语中，有很多读音相同但拼写和意义不同的汉字，因此容易产生语音歧义。 2、一词多音引起的歧义
从认知语言学的角度看一词多义现象 摘要：一词多义指一个词项具有多个相关义项的语言现象。新义项的产生不是随机的, 也不是盲目的, 而是人类认知参与下语言历时变化的结果, 因此认知角度的一词多义研究能够比较清楚地揭示一词多义的根源与本质。新义项以基本义项为核心, 按照辐射型或链接型方式排列, 构成一个词项意义的原型范畴。人们总是从基本义项出发, 主要利用隐喻和转喻思维等方式, 将新义项赋予现有词项, 从而使一词多义现象表现出明显的认知理据性。 关键词: 认知; 一词多义; 范畴化; 隐喻; 转喻 Abstract:Polysemy is the linguistic phenomenon in which a lexical item has more than one related meaning. It is the diachronic result of language development facilitated by human cognition. New meanings, centering on the basic meaning and arranged in a radiant or linear manner, form the prototypical category of a w ord. People tend to attach new meanings to a lexical item by w ay of categorization, metaphor and metonymy, which results in the striking motivational features of polysemy. Key words: cognition, polysemy, categorization, metonymy, metaphor 几乎所有的语言中都存在一个普遍现象, 即一个词可能会承载二种以上的意义, 语言学家将此语言现象称为一词多义现象。通过赋予同一词形以更多的词义来减少词的数量, 它极大地丰富了我们的语言，减轻了人们词汇记忆的负担，是人们进一步认知世界的简便、有效的途径,是优于造词、构词和借词的语言手段。因而，一词多义现象一直成为了语义学研究的热点。传统的理论对于一词多义现象做过众多的研究, 其中主要有: K atz 和Fo rdo r( 1963) 基于组词间的类似性提出的语义成分分析法(semantic feature analysis); 由德国学者J. Trier 提出的词在语义上是互相联系的完整的词汇系统语义场理论以及传统的真值语义分析。传统的语义学理论更多地将它归于历史的、社会的因素。这些固然是词义变化的重要因素, 但它们只是外部因素, 传统的语义学理论终究没有看清词义变化和一词多义的关系, 也未能充分地解释一词多义现象形成的缘由。本文试图从认知语义学的角度运用范畴化的型理论对一词多义现象的形成方式，发展模式以及认知手段进行研究。 1.认知语言学的语义观 认知语言观承认客观世界的现实性及对语言形成的本源作用, 但更强调人的认知的参与作用, 认为语言不能直接反映客观世界, 而是由人对客观世界的认知作用之。所谓“心生而言立” , 其认知模式是: 客观世界—认知加工一概念生成一语言符号(赵艳芳,20 0 1 : 3 5 )。Lakof与Jo h n s o n (1 9 8 0 : 1 9 5 : 1 9 9 9 ) 以及L a k o f (19 8 7 )根据他们提出的体验哲学认为: 人类的认知、概念、意义、推理和语言等均源于对客观外界的感知和经验, “体验哲学和C L (cognitive linguistics ) 认为认知来源于实践, 语言是体验和认知的结果” (王寅, 2 0 0 5 : 1 6 )。认知是和语言不可分的, 认知是语言的基础和发端。语言是由客观世界, 人的认知体验, 社会、文化历时与共时价值观及其语用因素促动形成的、具有动态演绎、延异性质和形态的象征符号系统和精
第一章作为语言学一个分支的语义学 语义学的建立以法国学者米歇尔·布勒阿尔1897年7月出版《语义学探索》为标记。 该书1900年翻译为英文“语义学：意义科学的研究（Semantics:Studies in the Science of Meaning）”。 这本专著材料丰富，生动有趣，重点在词义的历史发展方面，兼顾词汇意义和语法意义。 全书共三编：1，讲词义变化的定律，介绍变异、扩散、类推等概念；2，讲如何确定词义，介绍释义、比喻、多义、命名等；3，讲词类、词序、组合规则等，涉及语法意义。 除了语言学的语义学，还有逻辑学的语义学，哲学的语义学，还有心理学家对语义的研究。 a,逻辑学的语义学是对逻辑形式系统中符号解释的研究，又称“纯语义学”，对象并非自然语言的语义。 b,哲学的语义学围绕语义的本质展开涉及世界观的讨论。“语义学”或“语义哲学”又是本世纪前半叶盛行于西方的至今仍有影响的一个哲学流派的名称。 c,心理学家研究语义，主要是想了解人们在信息的发出和接收中的心理过程。 d,语言学的语义学把语义作为语言（乃至言语）的一个组成部分、一个方面进行研究，研究它的性质，内部结构及其变异和发展，语义间的关系等等。 布勒阿尔的书给语义的发展以重要地位，声称研究语义的变化构成了语义学。同时它把语义限制在“词语”的意义上，主要是词义上。这两个特点一直贯穿在他以后半个多世纪的若干代表性著作里。 继布勒阿尔之后，一部有世界影响的语义学专著是两位英国学者奥格登和理查兹合写，1923年出版的《意义的意义》（The Meaning of Meaning）。这两位学者还曾共同创制了后来遭到各种非议的“基本英语”(Basic English).
Vol.28No.3 M ar.2012 赤峰学院学报（自然科学版）Journal of Chifeng University （Natural Science Edition ）第28卷第3期（下） 2012年3月英语习语凝聚了英语民族人民的勤劳和智慧，是英语语言国家历史文化发展的结晶，体现了英语国家丰富的历史文化背景.学习英语习语可以成为英语专业学生学习和了解英语语言文化的一扇窗.可是，英语习语却因其结构与语义之间的差异，涉及面广泛繁杂，大多与民族历史发展、地理环境、传统习俗、宗教信仰，神话传说有关，而使学生深感习语语义难以理解，难以记忆，用法难以掌握.认知语义学研究表明,语言的意义与人的认知经验密切相关,习语的意义也是在人类在认知世界的过程中，通过一定的认知机制发展起来的，本文拟从认知语义学的角度出发来揭示英语习语的本质,并运用概念隐喻、转喻与常规知识等主要认知机制分析英语习语的语义.1 传统语义学对习语语义的阐释 传统语义学认为，习语是具有固定的结构，在语义和语法上能独立运用的词组.它的意义一般不能由各组成部分推断出来（王宗炎，1988）.习语是独立于大脑理性思维和人类认知经验之外的抽象符号，它的本质是词汇，是语言系统的一个部分，而不是概念性的. 习语语义具有完整性，我们必须把习语作为一个整体来理解，构成习语的各个词汇失去了它们独立的语义，正如构成单词的每一个字母一般，分开以后毫无意义可言.习语的意义不是构成它的各个单词的意义的相加；如果将其拆分开，尽管可以理解每个单词的意义，但是仍然无法理解这个习语的意义.比如，“I am under the weather ”一句中，un-der the weather 意指“unhappy ”，单从字面意思来理解，毫无无法解释，一个人怎么能“在天气之下”呢？这也正是传统语言学家从习语的语义整体性来研究习语的原因. 习语具有结构的固定性，一般不能用别的词来代替，即使是同义词也不可以，比如，have an axe to grind (另有打算),不能换成“have a hatchet to grind ”.还有，习语中冠词的用法，名词单复数的用法，动词的主动或被动形式等都是固定的，大部分都不能随便进行句法转换.传统语义学认为，习语是一种约定俗成的习惯用法，是一种死喻，对于习语的学习就是死记硬背，模仿和记忆.2认知语义学视角下的习语意义阐释 2.1 习语是概念化的产物 针对传统的客观主义语义学观点，Lakoff &Johnson （1999）提出了基于体验哲学的认知语义观.他们认为人类的知识结构并非符号结构，也不能与客观世界直接对应，人类的知识结构，是概念结构，是人客观世界互动过程中逐渐获得.意义是基于体验的心智现象，是主客观互动的结果.意义需依靠原型范畴，概念化、意象图示来限定的.范畴、概念、推理和心智并不是外部现实客观的、镜像的反映，也不是先天就有的，而是人们在对客观外界感知和体验的基础上认知加工而形成的.完全可以想象，我们的祖先是从认识空间和自身开始认识世界的.人们在经验和行为中形成了范畴和概念，与此同时也就形成了意义（王寅，2007）. 从这个意义上来看，习语也是人类认知和体验的结果.因此，我们可以这样认为，在语言和现实之间存在思维和认知这一中间层次，如果不依赖范畴知识、概念结构和认知方式，就无法接近现实.习语是人类概念体系的产物,不仅仅属于语言本身的问题.习语确实有它的特殊意义,我们应看到这些特殊意义正是来源于人类对客观物质世界的认识,而我们的概念体系正体现了这种认识. 在日常生活中，人们往往参照他们熟知的，有形的，具体的概念来认识、思维、经历、对待无形的、难以定义的概念，形成了一个不同概念之间相互关联的认知方式.以head 一词为例，the head of deparment,head of state,head of government,head of page,head of queue,head of a flower,head of stairs,head of a bed,head of a tape recorder,head of syntactic construction …在head 的所有例子中，所表达的概念都与“头”这一概念紧密联系，表达“the front part of …”或“the vitally important part ”. 比如，在英语中有大量这样以身体词汇概念，产生的习语,play it by ear(随机应变，见机行事),rack your brains （绞尽脑汁想）,turn a blind eye （熟视无睹）,a stiff upper lip （泰然自若，坚定不移）,keep your mouth shut and your eyes open （多看少说）,从这些习语的语义，可以看出人类的认知 英语习语解析———认知语义学视角 李红珍 （孝感学院外国语学院，湖北孝感432000） 摘要：认知语义学为我们提供了探索习语语义的新视角。传统的习语意义观认为习语是不可分析、任意的.认知语义学则认为习语是概念体系的产物,其意义有理据和可分析性.在英语教学中运用认知语义学理论解释和分析英语习语的语义，可以提高学生准确运用习语的能力. 关键词：习语；认知语义学；认知机制中图分类号：G642.3 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1673-260X （2012）03-0250-02 250--
语义学概论教学设计 （一）教学目标：了解汉语语义学的起源、发展和现状。 （二）教学内容：汉语语义学与其他学科的关系、作用。 1．一次课学习一章，掌握1～2个主要观点；1～2个知识点。 2．完成一次课堂训练；一次作业。 3．评讲一次课外作业。 第一章语义研究的发展与现状 一、语文学时期我国的训诂学 （一）训诂学起源 1．为了注释古代典籍 古人的古人所撰写的典籍，时间久远由于语言的变化而难于理解，所以解释工作就显得十分必要。为古代的典籍进行注解就是《传》，例如春秋战国时代的典籍，《春秋》，儒家经典之一，相传孔子（-552～-479）依据鲁国史官所编《春秋》加以整理修订而成。（-772～-481）计242年。《春秋》文字简短，相传寓有褒贬之意，后世称为“春秋笔法”。［辞海缩印本1979年版P1611］解释《春秋》的有《春秋左氏传》（亦称《春秋左氏传》儒家经典之一，旧传春秋时左丘明［与孔子同时或曰在前］所撰，请代经今文学家认为系刘歆改编。近人认为是战国初年人据各国史料编成。多用事实解释《春秋》，同《公羊传》、《榖梁传》完全用义理解释的有异。起于鲁隐公元年（-722），终于鲁悼公四年（-464），比《春秋》多出十七年，其叙事更止于鲁悼公十四年（-454）为止。书中保存了大量古代史料，文字优美，记事详明，实为中国古代一部史学和文学名著。P156）、《公羊传》（旧题：战国时，公羊高传初时仅口头流传，汉初才成书。据唐徐彦《公羊传疏》引戴宏序，说是由景帝时公羊寿和胡母生（子都）“著于竹帛”［辞海缩印本1979年版P280］）、《榖梁传》等三传。 又如《诗经》成书于春秋时代［-770周平王元年～-476周敬王四十四年］《尚书》［尚即上，由中国上古历史文件和部分追述古代事迹著作的汇编，相传由孔子编选而成。P1116］《周礼》《仪礼》《礼记》等等均成于春秋时期。到了汉代，著名经学家郑玄（127～200）为诸多古代典籍作注，如《十三经注》。到了唐代，汉代的注又看不懂了，于是又有人出现给注作注。孔颖达（574～648）奉唐太宗命主编《五经正义》就是对注释的注释。这表明：训诂学就是解释学，是重在对意义的解释。语言研究重在解释古代典籍、风俗、习惯、制度等的工具。 语文学时期及我国的训诂学时期 主要是为了注释古代经典。如： 有朋自远方来不亦说乎？ 朋：朋友；说：悦，高兴；乎：吗？ 二传统语义学 19世纪语言学成为一门独立的，有自己理论与方法的科学；发展步伐加快，领域扩大了。语义学则成为语言学的一个分支——词汇学的重要内容。 最后由词义研究独立建立一门科学：语义学。 1838年德国人提出建立一门独立的语义学。1893年法国人首先使用语义学这一专门术语。 传统语义学研究：词义、语音、客观事物三者的关系；词义与概念的关系；词义的色彩；多义词、同学出版社2004 三、现代语义学的兴起和现状 作为语言学的一个分支词汇学的重要内容。以具体的语言的语义研究为基础。
作者简介:束定芳(1962— ),副教授,博士,研究方向:隐喻学,现代语义学收稿日期:1999112118 2000年第7期 总第135期 外语与外语教学 Foreign Languages and Their Teaching 2000,№7Serial №135 现代语义学的特点与发展趋势 束定芳 (上海外国语大学《外国语》编辑部,上海 210083) 提 要:本文简要回顾了语义学发展的几个重要阶段:准备阶段、词源学阶段、结构主义阶段和现代多元化阶段。作者 指出,现代语义学研究具有以下几个特点:多学科、跨学科、多层次、多视角。现代语义学词义层次的研究在很大程度上受到了语言哲学和认知语言学的影响,而在句子层次上的研究则受到了逻辑语义学的影响,因此,作者认为,认知语义学和形式语义学是现代语义学发展的两个重要方向。 关键词:语义学;词义;认知语义学;形式语义学 Abstract :This paper first reviews the major stages of development in modern semantics and their characteristic features.Then the author focuses his discussion on some of the most important are as of research in contemporary semantics ,which ,in the au 2thor ’s view ,are multi-disciplinary ,multi-level ,multi-perspective and cognitive in nature.The author points out that studies in contemporary lexical semantics and formal semantics are heavily tainted with cognitive and logical concepts and the situation will not be likely to change any time soon. K ey words :semantics ,lexical meaning ,cognitive semantics ,formal semantics 中图分类号:H030 文献标识码:A 文章编号:1004-6038(2000)07-0028-05 引言 语义学是一门古老而又年轻的学科。说它古老,因为从古代开始,人们就对语言意义的本质发生了兴趣。例如古希腊哲学家们对“规约论”和“自然论”的争论,中国古代的“名”与“实”之争等等,都可以认为是对语言意义问题的最早关注。中国有着几千年传统的《小学》在很大程度上也是对语言文字意义的研究。 英语中现代意义上的“semantics ” (语义学)一词最早是由法国语文学家Michel Breal 使用的。1894年,在美国语文学会的一次会议上,Breal 宣读了一篇题为“被呈现的意义:语义学中的一个要点”的论文,第一次使用了“semantics ”这个词。其实,英语中的“semantics ”来自于法语中的“seman 2tique ”,其意思是“语义的变化”。也就是说,当时的语义学研究的是意义的变化。1900年,Breal 出版了英文版的《语义学:意义科学研究》,对语义学的研究对象和方法做了系统的阐述。该书的法语原版出版于1897年。Palmer 在评价这本书时说过,“这是一本非常难得的好书,很可惜被人们忽视 了。” (Palmer ,1976:Introduction )一、语义学发展的几个重要阶段 根据语义学近100年来的发展过程和特点,我们可以把语义学研究概括为四个阶段:(一)准备阶段;(二)词源学阶段;(三)结构主义阶段;(四)多元化阶段。 语义学发展过程中的第一阶段为准备阶段,时间跨度大约是1825年至1880年。19世纪末,两个重要的因素为语义学的诞生创造了条件。一是历史比较语言学的兴起。历史比较语言学是现代意义上的语言学,有自己独立的理论目标、研究对象和研究方法;二是浪漫主义诗人对词语的特别兴趣。为了诗歌创作和评论的需要,他们对各种词汇,如古词、生僻词、俚语、长词的特点以及它们的修辞功能进行了广泛的研究。这都对语义研究的兴起、发展和自主化起到了促进作用。 当时在德国Halle 大学开设拉丁语文学的德国学者Christian Karl Reisig 曾提出过语法的三分说。他把语法研究的内容分为:符号学(semasiology )、词源学(tyemology )和句法学(syntax )。其中,符号学的目标就是研究语义变化及其
《产品语义学》教学大纲 一、课程的的性质、任务及适用专业 （一）课程性质 《产品语义学》是工业设计专业的一门必修课。课程从设计符号的基本理论出发，对意义、传达、语境、修辞等概念进行了阐述，使学生通过学习了解并掌握新的设计思考的角度和敏锐的观察能力，使学生从感性认识提升到理性认识，并且引导以产品语义学在设计中广泛扩展思路，帮助学生提高设计的创新能力。 （二）教学任务 本课程的主要任务是：使学生通过符号的关联性和语言学中的修辞方法展开发散思维与联想，以期觅得产品预定概念和意义的最佳传达途径，并对后续的专业课程学习起辅助作用。 （三）适用专业 适用于工业设计本科专业。 二、课程教学基本内容、基本要求及学时分配 （一）基本内容(含章节的重点、难点等) 第一章设计符号理论概 述 基本要求：了解设计符号的理论意义、符号理论发展简史、设计符号的特性以及文化与符号之间的关系。 重点:设计符号的特点。 难点:文化与符号之间的联系。 第二章产品语义学概述 基本要求：了解产品语义学的概念、产品语义学的缘起与发展、影响产品语义理论的诸多新观念以及产品语义学对我国设计发展的价值。 重点:产品语义学的缘起与发展。 难点:产品语义学与现代主义及后现代主义的关系。 第三章产品的语义 基本要求：了解产品语义的外延意义与内涵意义，以及两者之间的关系，从而掌握产品语义的诉求层面。 重点：外延意义与内涵意义。 难点：产品语义的诉求层面。 第四章产品语义的传达 基本要求：了解意义的来源，学习人的要素、环境的要素和生活方式的约定。进而对产品语义有一个更高层次上的理解，使学生以使用者的角度认知产品、以及了解使用者心理模型和产品语义实现的条件。 重点：传达的概念与过程、语义传达的类型。 难点：使用者心理模型和产品语义实现的条件、产品语言的局限性。 第五章产品语义学在设计中的运用 基本要求：了解产品使用情景语境，产理解产品的合理性说服、情感性说服以及产品语义设计程序，了解修辞在产品语义表达中的应用及价值。 重点：产品说服功能与语义设计程序、产品语义传达的有效思维方法。
从词汇语义学角度对比分析《呼啸山庄》的中译 【摘要】滋生于欧美的当代比较语言学，并不一定能成功解决所有语言教学难题，但其重要性却不容忽视。文章从词汇层次，特别是从语义学角度的词义分类和动机方面对《呼啸山庄》的中译进行对比分析。此外，这项研究的局限性可为进一步作这方面的研究起一定的铺垫作用。 【关键词】对比分析《呼啸山庄》语义学动机词义分类 词汇的对比研究包括分析词态学和语义学。本文从后者，即语义学的角度出发，对《呼啸山庄》的中译进行对比分析。语义学是法国语言学家Michel Breal 1984年在美国举行的一 次研讨会上提出来的，六年后英文本《语言学》出版。Breal 在书中首次对语义学的研究从目标和方法角度作出了系统 分析。语义学被确立为一门分支学科后，经历了四个发展阶段，即早期语义学、语源学、结构语义学和多元语义系统研究。与传统语义学不同，现代语义学注重对词汇语义学和句法语义学的研究。本文把重点放在词汇语义学上,这对于从词汇角度对比研究《呼啸山庄》的中译很重要。 许余龙曾对比较语言学这样下定义：比较语言学是一门针对两种（或两种以上）语言进行有系统的共时描述，旨在为与语言相关的活动确定它们之间的相似和相异之处，并找
出这种相似和相异含义的语言学分支。这为一些语言学家所接受，比较语言学也在语言教学过程中开始起到了一定的作用。因此，国内外的语言学家们关注过或一直重视着比较研究这一课题，如赵元任、吕淑湘、刘糜庆、王宗言、许国璋和B.L.Worf,Robert Lado(1957), Catford, Holmes, Hatim。《呼啸山庄》(Wuthering Heights)英文原版是英国文学史上的一位杰出人物艾米莉?q勃朗特的作品，艾米莉?q勃朗特因所写小说的独特而被英国著名小说家和评论家William Somerset Maugham 称为十大杰出人物之一,中国大陆上出现了三种中译版本，其中以杨苡和张玲、张扬两种译本最为流行，本文选这两种译本作为对比研究的对象。 一、文献回顾 1、词义的分类 毋庸置疑，现代语义学的研究目标是词汇意义，而词义是难以定义和分类的。根据现代朗文英语词典，“meaning”(意义)一词指的是：①意思；含义。②重要性；价值；意义。 ③意味深长的。[1]684本文在此采用第一种定义。一般而言，西方语言学界对词义有三种典型的分类。Grice从应用语言的角度把语义分为四种类型：永恒意义、应用永恒意义、场景意义和说话场景意义。而Kitty则在Grice的研究基础上把句
反事实条件句语义学理论的发展分析 在自然语言中，我们把形如如果p，那么q 的语句称为条件句。而条件句涉及逻辑学的核心问题推理，或者从更宽泛的意义上说，全部逻辑，至少是旨在刻画推理的逻辑，都建立在澄清和研究若 A 则 B的真值和涉及此类条件句的推理的形式有效性之上。①因而具有重要的意义。一般来说，条件句分为直陈条件句和反事实条件句，条件句关注最多的就是后者，不仅因为它在日常生活中大量存在，还由于它有不同于一般条件句的自身特点。通常人们认为前件为假的条件句为反事实条件句，但前件为假有两种情况，一种是客观事实上是假的，另一种是主观认定是假的 ( 而客观事实是真的) 。客观事实上为假的反事实条件句，例如，我为昨天开会迟到而感叹地说如果我没有迟到，我就不会被批评了。主观认定是假的反事实条件句，举个例子，我们学校举行元旦晚会，张三很有表演才华，他的节目是压轴戏，最后我没看完提前回家，第二天见到张三的时候说了这么一句话要是你参加了昨天的晚会，节目会更精彩。在这种情况下，对于我而言，我表达的是一个反事实条件句，尽管我所说的与客观事实是一致的。本文中我们用□表示反事实条件句的逻辑符号，用 p□q 表示反事实条件句如果 p，那么 q。 历史上人们尝试用各种不同的方法来刻画它，这些方法大致来自三个方面的: 语形的、语义的和语用的，而从语用学角度刻画反事实条件句起步较晚，文献较少，本文主要从语义学的角度综述了反事实条件句理论的发展。反事实条件句语义学理论的发展经历了从传统的静态语义学向现代的动态语义学的发展。 一、用传统的静态语义学理论刻画反事实条件句 我们知道，传统逻辑语义学对意义的理解就是它的成真条件，这种意义理论描述的是语言与客观事物之间的静态关系，因此是静态语义学。实质蕴含理论、严格蕴含理论、可共存性理论和 Stal-nakerLewis 可能世界语义学理论都属于传统的静态语义学理论。 ( 一) 实质蕴含理论 实质蕴含源于古希腊斯多葛学派，有着悠久的研究历史，其核心思想是: 不考虑前后件之间的联系，条件句的真值由它的肢命题的真值决定。它的逻辑特征是: 如果有 p，就必然有 q，而没有 p 是否有 q 不能确定。根据特征，我们知道，条件句在三种情况下是真的，即 p 真 q 真，p 假 q 真，p 假q 假。这条进路除了会出现违反人们直觉的怪论( 假命题蕴含任何命题，真命题为任一命题所蕴含) 外，还会与自然语言的使用不符。问题就出在后两行，因为根据真值表，如果前件假，而不管后件为真还是为假，整个条件句都是真的，而这与反事实条件句不符合。这样一来，所有的反事实条件句都是真的，因为反事实条件句前件假。如: ( 1) 如果我念了博士，我就可以找到更好的工作。 ( 2) 如果我念了博士，我也不可以找到更好的工作。 人们通常会认为 ( 1) 是真的， ( 2) 是假的，而不会根据实质蕴含的真值表认为两句都是真的，因为这样做太违反直观了。除此之外，运用实质蕴含理论刻画反事实条件句，导
从语义学角度分析英语中的词汇歧义现象 摘要：歧义是存在于古今中外所有语言中的一种常见的语言学现象，是语言结构形式与其意义之间的一种特殊关系。语言学家认为一个词或一个句子的含义模糊现象，或者存在两种或多种意义解释的现象称之为语言歧义。由于英语的词汇量很大，语法又比较灵活，语言歧义现象在英语中表现得尤为突出。因此本文从语义学角度对英语中的词汇歧义现象进行分类讨论，分析引起歧义的各种因素，具有很重要的理论和现实意义。 一、引言 语义学，也可以称为“语意学”，是涉及计算机科学、自然语言处理、语言学、心理学、逻辑学以及认知科学等诸多领域的学科专用术语，以自然语言涵义为对象，以对语言的结构、性质以及相互间的关系进行分析、研究为主要内容。歧义的“歧”是指“不一致”，“义”指的是意义。语言学家认为：“语言歧义现象是指在语言交流过程中对一个词或一个句子的意思有不同的理解，可以作两种或多种解释”①。歧义在语言运用中是不可避免的，正如美国语言学家Kaplan曾说：“歧义是语言中反常的通病”②。因此，研究语言中的歧义现象，不仅能促进语言学理论的发展，还能有效避免语言歧义在交流中造成的误解和障碍，从而提高语言交际的准确性、严密性。因此，从语义学角度深入探讨歧义现象具有极大研究价值和现实指导意义。
二、词汇歧义现象分析 2.1 多义词歧义 多义词指具有二个或二个以上意义的词。在句子中，多义词的出现往往使句子产生歧义。美国语言学家G.L.Brook曾说：“一词多义是歧义的语言基础”③。把一个多义词用在特定的语境中，通常情况下它不会产生歧义。但是，如果一个多义词的几种意义在同一个句子中都能成立，那么，此句就有了歧义。例如“Are you engaged？”一句既可以理解成“你忙吗？”又可以理解成“你定婚了吗？”。 2.2 同形异义词歧义 同形异义词是指那些拼写相同而意义不同的词。同形异义词并不是同一个词，它不同于多义词，而是有着不同词源的两个或两个以上形式相同，但是意义不同的一种语言现象。同形异义词又可以分为：同音异义词、同形同音异义词及同形异义词三种形式。例如：Im More satisfied.Ask for more.这是摩尔牌香烟广告，该商标的同音同形异义词是英语中一个常用的与数量有关的形容词。 为什么我们能同时处理多个意义而不产生混乱呢？认知语义学中的家族相似性理论能够说明其原因，“家族成员中具有某种相似特征：体态、相貌、眼睛的颜色、步态和气质都有一些相似和重叠地方”④。人们凭直觉既可准确判断某人属于某一家族，又可识别其家族成员之间的细微差别。世界是由无限种类
我为何倡导研究“历史文化语义学” 2012年12月10日 02:32 来源：北京日报 分享到：更多 0人参与00条评论0原标题：我为何倡导研究“历史文化语义学” 近代以降，以汉字承载的中华文化遭遇了一场古今转换、中西互动相交织的大变局；近代新概念、新名词、新术语的生成与演变则是这一大变局的产物与表征。 新概念、新名词、新术语的语义学研究与历史学、文化学研究的融合，仍显不足 科学认识的成果，有待形成各种概念和术语来加以总结与概括，故各概念群的形成是诸学科建立的前提，有了“价值、资本、利润、劳动”等概念的厘定，现代经济学方得以运行；当“历史、古代、近代、现代”等概念的内涵与外延明晰起来，新史学才获得确切的表述。总之，人们思维的深度拓展，诸学科的建立，皆仰赖概念的锐意精进，反之，人们的思维发生逻辑错误，学科系统散漫无章，往往由概念被偷换、被滥用所导致的体系紊乱所致。故探讨概念的古今演绎与中外对接，寻觅厘定概念的正途，是诸学科健康成长的题中应有之义，也是思想史、文化史研究的一项基础性工作。 关于近代新名词、新术语生成的研究，长期受到多国学者的关注，迄今成果丰硕。其中，术语的语义学研究与历史学、文化学研究的融合，虽已为部分学者所注意，但深度结合仍显不足。鉴于此，我们提出并尝试一种新的研究范式——“历史文化语义学”。其主旨是：在古今转换、东西交会的时空坐标上展开研究，不仅对诸多汉字新语的生成、演变寻流讨源，而且透过语义的窗口，观照语义变迁中所蕴藏的历史文化意涵，展现中国近代异彩纷呈、后浪逐前浪的历史文化状貌。 “历史文化语义学”透过运动着的语言文字这扇窗口，展现的是历史文化的壮阔场景
语义学与翻译 【摘要】语义学是从哲学和语言学方面研究意义的一门学科。第二次世界大战以后，由于不同学科的相互影响，对语义的研究迅速发展。20世纪20～30年代盛行的逻辑实证主义对以后的语义研究产生了重大影响。以卡纳普为代表的“学院派”语义哲学家认为，现代逻辑的主要任务是对“理想”的语言作语法（句法）的语义描写和分析。所指“理想”语言的语义即联结语言符号和世界可见现实或可感知经验的纽带。在他们看来，自然语言在某种程度上是原始的、模糊的、不精确的和容易混淆的。美国人类语言学家沃夫提出了语言相对论，认为说话者学习和使用的语言决定了说话者的感知和思想框架。到40年代，剑桥学派代表人物g.e.穆尔及l.维特根斯坦又提出了“普通语义学”理论。50年代，美国语言学家哈里斯、乔姆斯基等创立转换-生成语法理论，对自然语言的句法结构提出更深刻的见解。 【关键词】语义学；翻译；转换生成语法理论 一、定义 胡壮麟的《语言学教程》里是这样给语义学定义的“semantics examines how meaning is encoded in a language. it is not only concerned with meanings of words as lexical items， but also with levels of language below the word and above it， e.g. meaning of morphems and sentences. the following are what the key concepts look like： semantic components， denotation of
2010 年 1 月
ISSN 1009-5039
hwsy@https://www.doczj.com/doc/3b9885239.html,
Overseas English 海外英语 https://www.doczj.com/doc/3b9885239.html,
Overseas English 海 外 英 语
Tel:+86-551-5690811 5690812
从语义学的角度分析广告语中的歧义现象
周 燕
（广东工业大学 商学院， 广东 广州 511495 ）
摘要：歧义是一种常见的语言学现象，它指一个词或短语有多个不同的意义。 歧义在广告中广泛应用。 该文试从歧义的定义、歧义的 分类以及歧义在广告中的作用等方面分析歧义在广告中的作用机制以及其有用性。 关键词：歧义；一词多义；广告 中图分类号：H315 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1009-5039(2010)01-0147-02 义之间有历史渊源，这样的多义就是一词多义 ，以 下 是 一 个 典 型例子：Spoil yourself and not your figure. 这 是 Weigh-watcher 冰 淇 淋 公 司 专 为 减 肥 者 设 计 的 冰 淇 淋的广告。 “spoil oneself ”指尽情享受，“spoil one's figure ”指身 材变胖。 该广告的意义在于说明 Weigh-watcher 冰淇淋味道好 又不会让人变胖。 天仙牌风扇的广告：“吹出来的名牌”。 此 处 的 “吹 ”为 一 词 多 义 ，它 有 两 种 含 义 ：“吹 风 ”和 “吹 牛”。 电风扇厂家的意旨显然不在后者，不 过 通 过 有 意 制 造 歧 义可以给读者留下更深刻的印象。
1 定义及其语言学意义
歧义指一个词或短语有多于一个 意 义 ， 通 常 提 供 其 他 信 息可消除歧义。 以 下 是 一 个 歧 义 的 例 子 ：I promise I'll give
you a ring tomorrow. “giving someone a ring ”的意思可以是给某
人打电话。 但是，很明显上句话中的“ring ”还可以 指 手 上 带 的 首饰，因此这是一个歧义句。 对意义的解释是理解歧义的关键。 “什 么 是 意 义 ”这 个 问 题历来是语言学家、修辞学家和心理学家共同关心的问题。 伍 谦光教授在其《语义学导论》中这样说：“意义是 语 言 和 世 界 之 间的联系，我们用语言来传达信息或表达意愿” [1]。成功的交际 在于双方对信息的理解， 这里的 “信息” 就 是 我 们 所 说 的 意 义。 但是，交际意义和字面意义通常不一样，我们所说的意义 应该包括字面意义和话语意义两个方面。 Sperber 和 Wilson 在 他 们 的 《关 联 理 论 》中 [2]，都 从 语 用 角 度 对 歧 义 有 类 似 的 论 述 。 因此，说话者有时有意使用歧义句来达到某种特殊的目的。 正 是意义的不确定性使我们的语言充满活力。 因此，人们非但不 避 免 歧 义 ，而 且 将 其 广 泛 应 用 于 文 学 、政 治 、法 庭 辩 论 以 及 幽 默等场合 [3]。
② 同音同形异义：它是指一个词有多个意义。它和一词多
义 的 区 别 在 于 ：首 先 ，这 些 意 义 之 间 没 有 什 么 规 律 ，意 义 之 间 不具有相互推断性；其次，这些意义缺乏一个中心意义。
I'm More satisfied. Ask for more. 这 是 摩 尔 牌 香 烟 广 告 ，该
商标的同音同形异义词是英语中一个常用 的 与 数 量 有 关 的 形 容词。 再看看下面这些例子。 “万事具备，只欠东风 ( 东风汽车广 告 ) ”，和“春兰，盛开在妩媚的春天 ( 春兰空调机 ) ”都使用了与上 面类似的手法。 还有如“要想皮肤好，早晚用大宝 ”，“早 晚 ”既 指早上和晚上，又指迟早。 为什么我们能同时处理多个意义 而 不 产 生 混 乱 呢 ？ 认 知 语 义 学 中 的 家 族 相 似 性 （family resemblance ）理 论 能 够 说 明 其 原因，“家族 成 员 中 具 有 某 种 相 似 特 征 ：体 态 、相 貌 、 眼 睛 的 颜 色、 步态和气质都有一些相似和重叠地方 [5]”。人们凭直觉既可 准确判断某人属于某一家族， 又可识别其 家 族 成 员 之 间 的 细 微差别。 世界是由无限种类繁多，性质、形状 和 颜 色 各 异 的 物 体组成的。 我们不是单个逐一地认识世界，而是按照群体去认 识。 也就是说，我们认识世界的方法是范畴化。 Labov 曾经说 过，“如果语言学是关于任何问题的研究，那就是范畴。 即研究 如何通过对各自不同的单位或单位群进行 范 畴 化 将 意 义 转 化 为声音”[6]。
2 歧义在广告语中的重要性
广告在现代高度商业化社会具有 至 关 重 要 的 作 用 ， 对 人 们的生活产生了深刻影响。 广告商力图用广告来影响消费者， 因此广告文体应运而生。 由于消费者不愿 花 较 长 时 间 来 研 读 广告， 广告必须能在较短时间内抓住读者 的 注 意 力 并 说 服 他 们。 广告语言同样不能回避歧义，一个好的广 告 必 须 具 有 “销 售力”，即勾起人们的购买欲望；同时还要具有 “记 忆 价 值 ”，即 让人们能记住它。 在广告中恰当使用歧义 能 增 强 广 告 的 销 售 力及记忆价值 [4] 。
3 广告语中歧义的分类及作用
在这一部分， 我将具体分析歧义 是 如 何 增 添 广 告 的 魅 力 的。 总的来说，歧义可以分为词汇和语法两个方面：
1) 词汇歧义： 词汇歧义可以分为一词多义和同音同形异
义。
2) 语 法 / 句 法 歧 义 ：语 法 歧 义 指 一 个 句 子 能 进 行 多 种 语 法
分析的性质。 出现语法歧义时可能一个词 有 两 种 词 性 或 一 个 句子含有多个同音同形异义词。 下面是一些例子：
① 一词多义：如果一个词有几个不同的意义，并且这些意
收稿日期：2009-12-18
本栏目责任编辑：谢媛媛
语言学研究
147
第一章语义研究的发展与现状 一语文学时期及我国的训诂学 1. 古希腊的语义研究 2. 中国古代的训诂学 3. 中外语文学的研究重点 a) 西方：注重语法、语音 b) 中国：注重语义、字义 二传统语义学 1. 语义学是语言学的重要分支，于19世纪末从词汇学中分立开来 2. 传统语义学的形成 3. 传统语义学的研究和成果 a) 阐明了词义、语音、客观事物三者的关系 b) 词义与概念的关系 c) 词义的色彩 d) 多义词、同音词、同义词、反义词 e) 词义的演变 4. 中国的语义学研究 5. 传统语义研究的弱点与影响 三现代语义学的兴起和现状 1. 现代语义学兴起的背景：信息科学的出现 2. 现代语义学的流派 a) 结构语义学 b) 解释语义学 c) 生成语义学 d) 菲尔默的语义理论 e) 切夫的语义理论 f) 逻辑-数理语义学 3. 我们对现代语义学的看法 a) 百家争鸣优于一枝独秀 b) 各家理论都有优劣 c) 不能离开语义认识语言、分析语言 d) 现代语义学否定了传统语义学的一些东西，也继承了传统语义学的一些东西 e) 现代语义学仍然很粗疏，不够成熟 4. 我们在当前的汉语语义研究中，应该注意些什么？ a) 我国的汉语语义研究起步较晚 b) 西方语义学不能直接洋为中用，原因有二： i. 研究的语言不同 ii. 哲学基础不同
第二章我们关于语言语义的一些基本知识 一语言是人类的基本工具之一 1. 手、语言、人脑是人类进化的产物 2. 文字和计算机对加强和延伸语言的作用很重要 3. 计算机是语言继文字之后的又一次突破 二语言的功能 1. 语言是交际工具 2. 语言是思维工具 三语言结构 1. 语言包括语音、语法、语义三个部分 2. 语义作为语言结构的重要价值 四语义系统 1. 语义与语音、语法的不同 2. 语音、语法、语义是相互依存、缺一不可的 3. 语音、语法是为语义服务的，语义不是为语音、语法服务的 4. 语音、语法的研究对研究语义的意义 五语义单位 1. 各种语义单位 a) 义位：义项 b) 义素：义位的组成部分 c) 语素义：构词语素的意义 d) 义丛：词组的意义，是义位的组合，有固定义丛和自由义丛之分 e) 句义：句子的意义 f) 言语作品义：言语或作品的篇章意义 g) 附加义：某些义位、句义和言语作品义的附加意义成分 2. 语义单位的几种关系 a) 语义单位与语音的关系 b) 语义单位与语法的关系 c) 语义单位与语言、言语的关系 六语义类型 1. 广义的语义 a) 反映义 i. 基本义和附加义 ii. 指称意义与系统意义 b) 语法意义：汉语中各种语法成分的内容 2. 狭义的语义：语义学研究的语言、言语的内容部分或意义方面 七人是怎样认识语义的 1. 认识义位 2. 认识义丛、句义和言语作品义