论文部分内容阅读
本文旨在从思想史角度描述美国19世纪和20世纪美国人类语言学① 的几个不同范式、各范式主要特征及其历史演变。本文说明: (1)在欧洲,尤其是德国丰富的人类哲学和语言学思想启发下,以及美国本土思想资源促成下,美国人类语言学家Boas在20世纪初建立的第一个人类语言学研究范式②,即通过语言了解一个民族的文化、心理、行为。以他为代表的这一代学者以描写美洲印第安语言为主,采用发现程序法了解濒临绝迹危险的少数族裔语言结构,并藉此探索那些民族深层的社会文化和心理特征。相对主义是该范式的哲学理据。(2)20世纪50—60年代,由于专业的语言学知识不再为语言学家所独有,这一个范式逐渐被既拥有语言学知识又擅长从事多民族、多语言的田野调查的社会语言学家提倡的范式取代。这就是以研究语言变化的社会维度、语体变化的动态因素、多民族的语言接触为主要研究对象的第二个范式,即社会语言学研究范式。历史主义和阐释学是该范式的哲学支撑点。(3)20世纪80—90年代出现的第三个范式是以“博采众长”为主要特征,在这一范式内从事研究的学者放弃了第二个范式的许多方法,逐步采用当代许多关于权力与知识、意识形态、政治等理论触角来启发自己的研究,探索深层语言与社会之间的关系。
The purpose of this paper is to describe several different paradigms of the American human linguistics in the United States in the 19th and 20th centuries, the main features of each paradigm and their historical evolution from the perspective of intellectual history. This article explains: (1) Under the inspiration of Europe, especially Germany’s rich philosophy of human philosophy and linguistics, and the resources of American native thoughts, the first human linguistics study initiated by American humanist linguist Boas in the early 20th century Paradigm ②, that is, through a language to understand a nation’s culture, psychology, behavior. This generation of scholars, represented by him, mainly focuses on the description of Native American Indian language, and adopts the discovery procedure to understand the language structure of ethnic minorities in danger of extinction and to explore the deep social, cultural and psychological characteristics of those ethnic groups. Relativism is the philosophical rationale of the paradigm. (2) In the 1950s and 1960s, since the professional knowledge of linguistics was no longer unique to linguists, this paradigm was gradually replaced by a social language that possesses both linguistic knowledge and is good at multi-ethnic, multi-lingual fieldwork The paradigm advocated by scholars replaces. This is the second paradigm that studies the social dimension of linguistic change, the dynamic factor of linguistic change, and the multi-ethnic language contact as the main research object, that is, the research paradigm of social linguistics. Historicism and hermeneutics are the philosophical supports of this paradigm. (3) The third paradigm emerged in the 1980s and 1990s is characterized by “drawing upon others,” and academics engaged in this paradigm abandoned many of the second paradigms and gradually adopted many of contemporary contemporary approaches to power and Knowledge, ideology, politics and other theoretical tentacles to inspire their own research, to explore the relationship between deep language and society.