论文部分内容阅读
生成语义学派和解释语义学派在６０年代和７０年代间的论战被看作当今世界语言学界一场最激烈的语言学“大战”。Ｈｕｃｋ＆Ｇｏｌｄｓｍｉｔｈ１９９５年写了一本题为《意识形态与语言学理论———乔姆斯基和有关深层结构的争论》（ＩｄｅｏｌｏｇｙａｎｄＬｉｎｇｕｉｓｔｉｃＴｈｅｏｒｙ———ＮｏａｍＣｈｏｍｓｋｙａｎｄｔｈｅＤｅｅｐＳｔｒｕｃｔｕｒｅＤｅｂａｔｅｓ）的语言学批评专著，对这场大战重新作出了评述，旨在为在这场语言学大战中败北的生成语义学派翻案，似乎要在一直不甘寂寞的美国语言学界挑起新的争端。书中触及到如何对语言学进行科学证伪的语言学理论价值观的问题。本文扼要地介绍和评价这本语言学批评专著的基本内容，并结合Ｎｅｗｍｅｙｅｒ（１９９６）的评说对生成语义学派和解释语义学派论战的意义做了一些简单的评价，认为：Ｈｕｃｋ＆Ｇｏｌｄｓｍｉｔｈ机械地借用了Ｌａｋａｔｏｓ（１９７０）的关于经验性科学命题证伪的科学批评框架，缺乏对语言理论模块性和形式语言学在语言研究中独特作用的认识，作茧自缚，自己把自己套进了一个无法自拔的怪圈。为生成语义派翻案是否成功是小事，学术争论是科学发展的动力，该书如果真地能引发出新的语言学理论争论倒会是语言?
The controversy that generated semantic schools and interpreted semantic schools between the 1960s and the 1970s was seen as one of the most fierce linguistic “wars” in linguistics in the world today. Huck & Goldsmith, in 1995, wrote a critical review on this critical battle of linguistic criticism entitled “Theory of Ideology and Linguistics - Chomsky and the Debate on Deep Structure” The translation of the semantic semantics that led to the defeat in this linguistic battle seemed to provoke a new dispute in the American linguistics community that has been lonely. The book touches on how to carry out the scientific falsification of Linguistics linguistics theory of value issues. This article briefly introduces and evaluates the basic content of this linguistic criticism monograph and makes some simple comments on the significance of the controversy between generating semantic schools and explaining the semantic schools based on the comments of Newmeyer (1996): Huck & Goldsmith mechanically borrowed Lakatos (1970), the scientific criticism framework on the falsification of empirical scientific propositions, lacked the understanding of the modularity of linguistic theories and the unique role of formal linguistics in linguistic research and clutched himself into a precocious circle. Is it a trivial matter to generate success of the semantic overturn? Academic debate is the motive force for scientific development. Will the book be a language if it can really trigger a new theory of linguistics?