“以言行事”的逻辑基础及其“意向性”疑难——从蒯因的“归谬法”到维特根斯坦与克里普克之争

文艺理论研究 ›› 2017, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (2): 183-192.

“以言行事”的逻辑基础及其“意向性”疑难——从蒯因的“归谬法”到维特根斯坦与克里普克之争

林云柯

华东师范大学

出版日期:2017-03-25 发布日期:2017-11-11
作者简介:林云柯，华东师范大学中文系文艺学专业博士生在读，研究领域为西方文艺理论与美学。
基金资助:
本文为国家社科基金重大项目“当代西方前沿文论研究”[项目编号：14ZDB087]阶段性成果。

The Logical Basis of "Illocution" and the Problem of "Intentionality": Quine's "Reducto ad Absurdum" and the Dispute between Wittgenstein and Kripke

Lin Yunke

East China Normal University (Shanghai 200241, China)

Online:2017-03-25 Published:2017-11-11
About author:Lin Yunke is a Ph.D. candidate in East China Normal University (Shanghai 200241, China). His major areas of academic specialty include Western theory of literature and art and aesthetics.

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 随着分析哲学，尤其是“日常语言分析”介入到文艺理论研究中，“以言行事”逐渐成为了一种被广泛参照的理论资源。然而对“以言行事”理论的直接使用，往往由于忽略了语言分析哲学内部的演化过程而造成了在“文艺理论”段出现的诸多问题。这其中最显眼的问题就是“以言行事”中的“意向性”问题。塞尔的经典论文《虚构话语的逻辑地位》标志着分析哲学对文学理论研究的直接介入，然而其中对给定“意向性”的立场却成为了新的难题。如何安置“意向性”的逻辑位置，就成为了“以言行事”理论介入文学理论研究时必须面对的问题，而这就需要我们站在语言分析哲学的内部视角，来探究“以言行事”的逻辑基础以解决这个疑难。本文通过对蒯因“译不准原理”中“归谬法”方法论的阐明以及著名的维特根斯坦与克里普克之争，对“以言行事”理论进行一次逻辑“下探”，最终说明“意向性”在“以言行事”理论中的逻辑地位，以及“以言行事”与文学理论相结合所导致的“日常伦理学转型”趋势。

关键词: 以言行事, 文学理论, 归谬法, 意向性, 遵循规则

Abstract: With the introduction of analytic philosophy in general and the analysis of everyday language in particular into studies of literary theory, illocution has become a widely accepted theoretical resource therein. The ready application of this theory in literary studies without considering its evolution within analytic philosophy has caused many problems in literary theory, the most visible of which is the issue of "intentionality" contained in illocution. Searle's seminal paper "The Logical Status of Fictional Discourse" marks the involvement of analytic philosophy in studies of literary theory, but his "given intentionality" stance has become a new problem. The logical status of intentionality has to be addressed in the introduction of analytic philosophy into studies of literary theory, which entails an examination of the logical basis of illocution from the point of view of analytic philosophy. The paper explores the logical basis of "illocutionary" by rethinking the "indeterminacy" of Quine and the significant dispute between Wittgenstein and Kripke in this regard, and illustrates the logical status of "intentionality" in "illocution" and the tendency of "the turn of everyday ethics" incurred by the blending of the speech act theory and literary theory.

Key words: illocution, literary theory, reductio ad absurdum, intentionality, rule-following

林云柯. “以言行事”的逻辑基础及其“意向性”疑难——从蒯因的“归谬法”到维特根斯坦与克里普克之争[J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(2): 183-192.

Lin Yunke. The Logical Basis of "Illocution" and the Problem of "Intentionality": Quine's "Reducto ad Absurdum" and the Dispute between Wittgenstein and Kripke[J]. Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art, 2017, 37(2): 183-192.

A.J.艾耶尔:《语言、真理与逻辑》,尹大贻译。上海:上海译文出版社,2006年。[Ayer,Alfred Jules.Language,Truth and Logic.Trans.Yin Dayi.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,2006.]
Baker,G.P.,and P.M.S.Hacker."Critical Study:on Misunderstanding Wittgenstein:Kripke's Private Language Argument."Synthese 58.3(1984):407-50.
Cavell,Stanley.Must We Mean What We Say:A Book of Essays.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000.xx.
迈克尔·达米特:《分析哲学的起源》,王路译。上海:上海译文出版社,2005年。[Dummett,Michael.Origins of Analytical Philosophy.Trans.Wang Lu.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,2005.]
冯庆:《虚构之为以言行事:约翰·塞尔的虚构理论》,《文艺理论研究》4(2012):116—21。[Feng,Qing."Fiction as Illocutionary Act:John Searle's Theory of Fiction."Theoretical Studies In Literature and Art 4(2012):116-21.]
Follesdal,Dagfin."Analytic Philosophy:What Is It and Why Should One Engage in It?"The Rise of Analytic Philosophy.Ed.Hans-Johann Clock.London:Blackwell Publishers,1999.
索尔·克里普克:《命题与必然性》,梅文译。上海:上海译文出版社,1988年。[Kripke,Saul A..Naming and Necessity.Trans.Mei Wen.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,1988.]
Kripke,Saul A..Wittgenstein on Rides and Private Language.Massachusetts:Harvard University Press,1995.
Mcdowell,John."Meaning and Intentionality in Wittgenstein's Later Philosophy."Midwest Studies in Philosophy XVⅡ(1992):44.
Oort,Richard van."Three Models of Fiction:The Logical,the Phenomenological,and the Anthropological."New Literary History 29.3(1998):439-65.
希拉里·普特南:《无本体论的伦理学》,孙小龙译。上海译文出版社,2008年。[Putnam,Hilary Whitehall.Ethics without Ontology.Trans.Sun Xiaolong.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,2008.]
蒯因:《词语与对象》,陈启伟等译。北京:人民大学出版社,2005年。[Quine,W.V..Word and Object.Trans.Chen Qimin,et al..Beijing:China Renmin University Press Company,2005.]
——:《从逻辑的观点看》,江天翼等译。上海译文出版社,1987年。[---.From a Logical Point of View.Trans.Jiang Tianyi etal.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,1987.]
Quine,W.V.."On Austin's Method."Theories and Things.Massachusetts:The Belknap Press ofHarvard University Press,1982.
Reed,Delbert.Origins of Analytic Philosophy:Kant and Frege.New York:Continuum International Publishing Group,2007.
Rorty,Richard M.."Metaphilosophical Difficulties of Linguistic Philosophy."The Linguistic Turn:Essays in Philosophical Method.Ed.Richard M.Rorty.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1992.
Rosen,Stanley.The Elusiveness of the Ordinary:Studies in the Possibility of Philosophy.New Haven:Yale University Press,2002.
约翰·塞尔:《心、脑与科学》,杨音莱译。上海译文出版社,2006年。[Searle,John R..Minds,Brains and Science.Trans.Yang Yinlai.Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House,2006.]
Searle,John R.."The Logical status of Fictional Discourse."New Literary History 6.2(1975):319-32.
---."Indeterminacy,Empiricism,and the First Person."The Journal of Philosophy 84.3(1987):123-46.
王峰:《美学语法》,北京大学出版社,2015年。[Wang,Feng.Aesthetic Grammar.Beijing:Peking University Press,2015.]
Wittgenstein,Ludwig.Philosophical Investigations.Ed and Trans.G.E.M.Anscombe.Basil:Basil Blackwell,1986.
---.On Certainty.Eds.G.E.M.Anscombe and George Henrik von Wright.Trans.G.E.M.Anscombe and Denis Paul.Basil:Basil Blackwell Oxford,1969.
Wright,Crispin."Kripke's Account of the Argument Against Private Language."The Journal of Philosophy 81.12(1984):759-78.
(1)在原文中,括号里的句子都以“without”开头,但是由于在现象学的视角下,括号本身就有“悬置”的功能,故不必将“without”翻译出来。
(2)另见W.V.Quine."Ontological Relativity",Ontological Relativity and Other Essays.(Columbia University Press,1977)p.27-68.

[1]	王宁. 雷蒙德·威廉斯之于当今文学和文化研究的意义 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(6): 20-29.
[2]	卢嫕. 从“纯意向性客体”到“绝对意向性客体”——论埃科的客体理论及其符号学内涵 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(6): 92-100.
[3]	安静. 从符号化的意向性通向艺术符号学的哲学向度：归纳认知视域下的赝品问题再探 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2022, 42(2): 137-145.
[4]	冯波. 政治复调与民间狂欢：二十世纪三十年代农民文学理论的历史症候 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2020, 40(3): 84-94.
[5]	卢亚明. 人学话语与新时期初年文学理论的知识生产 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2019, 39(5): 63-71.
[6]	韩尚蓉. 狡黠装置与现代文学之痛——柄谷行人文学论的一种视差性解读 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2019, 39(5): 83-91.
[7]	李洪波. 知识碎片和理论体系 ——论关键词作为文学理论知识体系的哲学基础 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2018, 38(5): 99-105.
[8]	汤拥华. 罗蒂与新实用主义文学理论的可能性 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2018, 38(5): 165-175.
[9]	邢建昌. 文学理论的知识学属性 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(6): 139-146.
[10]	南帆. 文学理论：全球化时代的民族性 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(3): 6-16.
[11]	代云红. 论华夏神话天文学与中国多民族国家的比较文学研究 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2017, 37(2): 37-47.
[12]	张巧. 用戴维森的事件理论谈论文学 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2016, 36(6): 91-100.
[13]	王晓华. 身体，生活世界与文学理论的重建 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2016, 36(4): 6-14.
[14]	尤西林. 以文学批评为枢纽的文学理论建构 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2015, 35(3): 69-74.
[15]	郝岚. 当今世界文学理论的系统论倾向 [J]. 文艺理论研究, 2015, 35(3): 124-130.