متن‌گرایی در مقابل حداقل‌گرایی در سمانتیک

نوع مقاله: پژوهشی اصیل

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای فلسفه (گرایش منطق)، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

2 استاد فلسفه (گرایش منطق)، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار فلسفه (گرایش منطق)، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

چکیده

متن‌گرایی، رقیب اصلی حداقل‌گرایی است. نزاع میان این دو رویکرد سمانتیکی، ریشه در نزاع قدیمی تعیین مرز میان سمانتیک و پراگماتیک دارد. متن‌گرایان مدعی‌اند که جملات زبان‌ طبیعی، قبل از غنی‌سازی پراگماتیکی، قابل ‌ارزش‌دهی نیستند. در مقابل، از نظر حداقل‌گرایان، محتوای سمانتیکی حداقلی وجود دارد که معنای قابل ارزش‌دهی جمله را به‌دست می‌دهد که متن اظهار، اثر محدودی روی آن دارد. این تقابل ناشی از شیوه و اندازه‌ای است که متن بر محتوای سمانتیکی تأثیر می‌گذارد. در این مقاله، پس از معرفی این دو رویکرد، استدلال‌های اصلی متن‌گرایان علیه حداقل‌گرایان را مطرح می‌کنیم. سپس نشان می‌دهیم که سمانتیک‌های حداقل‌گرایانه از قبیل سمانتیک اشاره‌‌ای کاپلان، با تفسیر عینی از متن نمی‌تواند مدل مناسبی حتی برای جملات حاوی ارجاع اول‌شخص ارائه کنند و برپایه‌ی تفسیری ذهنی از متن، تمایز نمایه‌ای از غیرنمایه‌ای واضح نیست و سایر عبارت‌های زبان نسبت به متن‌ها، به معنای عام می‌توانند نمایه‌ای باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Contextualism vs Minimalism in Semantics

نویسندگان [English]

  • Nima Ahmadi 1
  • Lotfollah Nabavi 2
  • Seyyed Mohammad Ali Hodjati 3
1 PhD Candidate, philosophical Logic, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 Professor, philosophical Logic, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, philosophical Logic, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

Contextualism is the main opponent of minimalism. The debate between these two semantical approaches, stem in an old fashion dispute to determine the border between semantics and pragmatics. Contextualists claim that the sentences in the natural language are not truth-evaluable before being enriched pragmatically. In contrast, in minimalists’ viewpoint, there is a minimal semantic content that provides the truth-evaluable meaning of sentences in a way that context of utterance has limited effects on it. This contrast is based on the way and extent to which context affects semantic content. In this paper, after introducing these two approaches, the main arguments of contextualists against minimalist are discussed, then we show that minimalistic semantics like Kaplan's LD with objective interpretation of context cannot present any proper model even for sentences containing first-person reference, and on the basis of a subjective interpretation of context, the indexical/non-indexical distinction is not clear and other expressions of natural languages can be indexical, in a broad sense.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Contextualism
  • Minimalism
  • Semantics
  • Pragmatics
  • Context
Atlas, Jay David. (1977). "Negation, ambiguity, and presupposition." Linguistics and Philosophy 1 (3):321-336.

Atlas, Jay D. (1979). "How linguistics matters to philosophy: Presupposition, truth, and meaning."  Syntax and semantics 11:265-81.

Austin, J. (1961). Philosophical Papers. J. Urmson & G. Warnock (eds.) (1979) 3rd ed. Oxford University Press. Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua. 1954. "Indexical expressions." Mind 63 (251):359-379.

Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua. 1954. "Indexical expressions."  Mind 63 (251):359-379.

Bianchi, C. (1999). "Three forms of contextual dependence". International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, Springer.

Bianchi, C. (2001). "Context of utterance and intended context". International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, Springer.

Bianchi, Claudia. (2010). "Contextualism." In Handbook of Pragmatics Online, edited by Jan-Ola Östman and Jef Verschueren.

Borg, Emma. (2004). Minimal semantics: Oxford University Press.

Borg, E. (2007). "Minimalism versus Contextualism in Semantics. Context-Sensitivity and Semantic Minimalism": New Essays on Semantics and Pragmatics. G. Preyer and G. Peter, Oxford University Press.

Borg, Emma. (2012). Pursuing meaning: Oxford University Press.

Braun, David. (1995). "What is character?"  Journal of Philosophical Logic 24 (3):227-240.

Cappelen, Herman, and Ernie Lepore. 2005. Insensitive Semantics: a Defence of Semantic Minimalism and Speech Pluralism. Oxford: Blackwell.

Carston, R. (2002). "Thoughts and utterances: the pragmatics of explicit communication". Blackwell.

Carston, R. (2008). "Linguistic communication and the semantics/pragmatics distinction." Synthese 165(3): 321-345.

Cohen, Jonathan. 2013. "Indexicality and the Puzzle of the Jonathan Cohen Answering Machine."  The Journal of Philosophy 110 (1):5-32.

Cohen, Jonathan, and Eliot Michaelson. 2013. "Indexicality and the answering machine paradox."  Philosophy Compass 8.

Corazza, Eros. (2007). "Contextualism, minimalism, and situationalism."  Pragmatics & Cognition 15 (1):115-137.

Corazza, Eros, and Jérôme Dokic. (2007). "Sense and insensibility or where minimalism meets contextualism." Context-sensitivity and semantic minimalism: Essays in semantics and pragmatics:169-193.

Gauker, Christopher. (2003). Words without meaning: Christopher Gauker.

Ghidini, C. and F. Giunchiglia (2001). "Local Models Semantics, or contextual reasoning= locality+ compatibility☆☆ This paper is a substantially revised and extended version of a paper with the same title presented at the 1998 Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Conference (KR'98). The order of the names is alphabetical." Artificial intelligence 127(2): 221-259.

Grice, H. P. (1975). "Logic and Conversation". The Semantics-Pragmatics Boundary in Philosophy. M. Ezcurdia and R. J. Stainton, Broadview Press: 47.

Jaszczolt, Katarzyna. (2005). Default semantics: Foundations of a compositional theory of acts of communication: Oxford Linguistics.

Kaplan, David. (1989a). "Afterthoughts". Themes from Kaplan, eds. J. Almog, J. Perry, and H. Wettstein. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kaplan, David. (1989b). "Demonstratives". Themes from Kaplan, ed. by Joseph Almog, John Perry and Howard Wettstein, 481-563. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kempson, Ruth M. (1975). Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics: Cambridge University Press Cambridge.

Kempson, Ruth. (1979). "Presupposition, opacity, and ambiguity."  Syntax and semantics 11:283-297.

MacFarlane, John. (2007). "Semantic minimalism and nonindexical contextualism."  Context-sensitivity and semantic minimalism: New essays on semantics and pragmatics:240-250.

MacFarlane, John. (2009). "Nonindexical contextualism."  Synthese 166 (2):231-250.

Mackinnon, DM, F Waismann, and WC Kneale. (1945). "Symposium: verifiability."  Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 19:101-164.

Perry, John, and Simon Blackburn. (1986). "Thought without representation."  Proceedings of the Aristotelian society, supplementary volumes 60:137-166.

Perry, John. 2006. "Using Indexicals." In The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Language, edited by Michael Devitt and Richard Hanley, 314--334. Blackwell.

Perry, John. 2009. Reference and Reflexivity. Vol. 112: Center for the Study of Language and Information. Stanford.

Predelli, Stefano. 1996. "Never put off until tomorrow what you can do today."  Analysis 56 (2):85-91.

Predelli, Stefano. (1998a). "I am not here now."  Analysis 58 (2):107-115.

Predelli, Stefano. 1998b. "Utterance, interpretation and the logic of indexicals."  Mind & Language 13 (3):400-414.

Predelli, Stefano. (2005a). "Contexts: Meaning, truth, and the use of language."

Predelli, Stefano. (2005b). "Painted leaves, context, and semantic analysis."  Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (3):351-374.

Predelli, Stefano. 2011. "I Am Still Not Here Now."  Erkenntnis 74 (3):289-303.

Recanati, François. (1993). "Direct reference: From language to thought."

Recanati, François. (2003). Literalism and contextualism: Some varieties. Oxford University Press.

Recanati, François. (2004). Literal meaning: Cambridge University Press.

Recanati, François. (2007). Perspectival thought: A plea for (moderate) relativism: Clarendon Press.

Recanati, François. (2008). "Moderate relativism."  Relative truth:41-62.

Schwarzschild, Roger. (2002). "Singleton indefinites."  Journal of semantics 19 (3):289-314.

Searle, John. (1979). "Expression and meaning: Studies in the theories of speech acts."  J. Searle.—Cambridge.

Searle, John. (1980). "The background of meaning."  Speech act theory and pragmatics:221-232.

Searle, John R, Ferenc Kiefer, and Manfred Bierwisch. (1980). Speech act theory and pragmatics. Vol. 10: Springer.

Searle, JR. (1992). "The Rediscovery of the Mind MIT Press."  Cambridge, MA.

Sherman, Brett. 2015. "Constructing Contexts."  Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy 2.

Sidelle, Alan. 1991. "The answering machine paradox."  Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (4):525-539.

Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Vol. 142: Harvard University Press Cambridge, MA.

Stanley, Jason, and Zoltan Gendler Szabó. 2000. "On quantifier domain restriction."  Mind & Language 15 (2‐3):219-261.

Travis, Charles. (1977). Saying and understanding: A generative theory of illocutions. Blackwell.

Travis, Charles. (1981). The True and the False: the Domain of the Pragmatic: John Benjamins Publishing.

Travis, Charles. (1985). "On what is strictly speaking true."  Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15 (2):187-229.

Travis, Charles. (1996). "Meaning's role in truth."  Mind 105 (419):451-466.

Travis, C. (1997). "Pragmatics." In A Companion to the Philosophy of Language, edited by Crispin Wright and Bob Hale, 87-107. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations.Blackwell