萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说在中国的研究与解读
发布时间：2019-01-09 13:46
【摘要】：萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说是一个具有极大争议性和影响力的理论,引起了社会语言学、人类语言学、认知语言学、心理语言学、文化语言学等很多语言学分支学科的极大兴趣。然而,一方面,自20世纪50年代假说传入中国以来,中国学者对假说的解读与沃尔夫对假说的叙述并不一致,甚至差异较大。另一方面,由于受到文化大革命的影响,中国学者对假说的研究起步较晚,与国外相关研究差距较大。目前大部分中国学者对假说的研究要么是梳理假说渊源,要么讨论假说的真值。对假说在中国的解读情况及中国学者对假说的研究与国外相关研究差距的研究还相对较少。本文拟对假说在中国的解读及研究情况进行探讨。本论文运用文献法和对比法,回顾了涉及到假说的中国著作,以沃尔夫作品集《语言、思维和现实》为基础分析假说,通过把中国学者对假说的解读与沃尔夫本人的阐述进行对比,把中国学者对假说的研究与国外相关研究进行对比,基本反映出了中国学者对假说解读和研究情况。经过对比和分析,本文得出了以下有关假说在中国解读和研究情况的结论:80年代以前,由于受到历史背景的影响,中国学者涉及到假说的文献数量并不多,他们对假说也很难进行客观地解读。几乎所有学者都对假说持批判态度。80年代后,涉及到假说的文献数量大大增加,学者们对假说的解读也逐渐客观忠实。假说的价值在中国学者们所著的语言学分支学科著作中得到了承认。但也应看到,对假说的误读仍然存在。在对假说的研究方面,中国学者对假说的研究与国外差距较大,与国外相比,不仅数量少,而且原创性和创新性不高。大部分中国学者的著作都是介绍型和评述型,而研究型著作相对较少。在实证型研究方面中国与国外研究差距明显。本文的发现对今后假说的研究方向和方法具有一定的启示意义。
[Abstract]:The Sapir-Wolff hypothesis is a highly controversial and influential theory, which has aroused great interest in many linguistic branches such as sociolinguistics, human linguistics, cognitive linguistics, psycholinguistics, cultural linguistics and so on. However, on the one hand, since the hypothesis was introduced into China in the 1950s, the interpretation of the hypothesis by Chinese scholars and Wolff's narration of the hypothesis are inconsistent or even quite different. On the other hand, due to the influence of the Cultural Revolution, Chinese scholars started the research of hypothesis relatively late, which is far from the relevant research abroad. At present, most Chinese scholars study hypotheses either by combing their origins or discussing the true values of hypotheses. The interpretation of hypothesis in China and the gap between Chinese scholars' research on hypothesis and foreign research are relatively few. This paper discusses the interpretation and research of hypothesis in China. In this paper, the literature method and contrast method are used to review the Chinese works related to the hypothesis and analyze the hypothesis based on the Wolff collection language, thought and reality. By comparing Chinese scholars' interpretation of hypotheses with Wolfe's own, and comparing Chinese scholars' researches on hypotheses with those of foreign countries, it basically reflects the situation of Chinese scholars' interpretation and study of hypotheses. Through comparison and analysis, this paper draws the following conclusions about the interpretation and research of hypotheses in China: before the 1980s, due to the influence of historical background, the number of Chinese scholars involved in the hypothesis was not much. They also find it difficult to interpret hypotheses objectively. Almost all scholars hold critical attitude to hypothesis. After 1980s, the number of documents concerning hypothesis has increased greatly, and scholars' interpretation of hypothesis has gradually become objective and faithful. The value of hypotheses is recognized by Chinese scholars in the branch of linguistics. But it should also be noted that the misreading of the hypothesis still exists. In the research of hypothesis, Chinese scholars have a big gap with foreign countries. Compared with foreign countries, the number of hypotheses is not only small, but also the originality and innovation are not high. Most of the works of Chinese scholars are introductory and critical, while research works are relatively few. In empirical research, the gap between China and foreign research is obvious. The findings of this paper have some enlightening significance for the research direction and method of hypothesis in the future.
【学位授予单位】：内蒙古大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H0-0
本文编号：2405705
[Abstract]:The Sapir-Wolff hypothesis is a highly controversial and influential theory, which has aroused great interest in many linguistic branches such as sociolinguistics, human linguistics, cognitive linguistics, psycholinguistics, cultural linguistics and so on. However, on the one hand, since the hypothesis was introduced into China in the 1950s, the interpretation of the hypothesis by Chinese scholars and Wolff's narration of the hypothesis are inconsistent or even quite different. On the other hand, due to the influence of the Cultural Revolution, Chinese scholars started the research of hypothesis relatively late, which is far from the relevant research abroad. At present, most Chinese scholars study hypotheses either by combing their origins or discussing the true values of hypotheses. The interpretation of hypothesis in China and the gap between Chinese scholars' research on hypothesis and foreign research are relatively few. This paper discusses the interpretation and research of hypothesis in China. In this paper, the literature method and contrast method are used to review the Chinese works related to the hypothesis and analyze the hypothesis based on the Wolff collection language, thought and reality. By comparing Chinese scholars' interpretation of hypotheses with Wolfe's own, and comparing Chinese scholars' researches on hypotheses with those of foreign countries, it basically reflects the situation of Chinese scholars' interpretation and study of hypotheses. Through comparison and analysis, this paper draws the following conclusions about the interpretation and research of hypotheses in China: before the 1980s, due to the influence of historical background, the number of Chinese scholars involved in the hypothesis was not much. They also find it difficult to interpret hypotheses objectively. Almost all scholars hold critical attitude to hypothesis. After 1980s, the number of documents concerning hypothesis has increased greatly, and scholars' interpretation of hypothesis has gradually become objective and faithful. The value of hypotheses is recognized by Chinese scholars in the branch of linguistics. But it should also be noted that the misreading of the hypothesis still exists. In the research of hypothesis, Chinese scholars have a big gap with foreign countries. Compared with foreign countries, the number of hypotheses is not only small, but also the originality and innovation are not high. Most of the works of Chinese scholars are introductory and critical, while research works are relatively few. In empirical research, the gap between China and foreign research is obvious. The findings of this paper have some enlightening significance for the research direction and method of hypothesis in the future.
【学位授予单位】：内蒙古大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H0-0
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 杨朝春;;语言与思维关系研究述评[J];语文学刊(外语教育教学);2015年10期
2 房娜;谭业升;;以域为中心,还是以结构为中心?——语言相对性的实证研究方法述评[J];西安外国语大学学报;2015年01期
3 庞双子;;“假说”和“原则”——沃尔夫语言相对论原则内涵解读[J];外语学刊;2015年01期
4 张会平;刘永兵;;语言、文化、思维方式之关系论——对语言相对论的重新审视[J];语言学研究;2014年02期
5 周娟;;萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说中折射出的语言与文化的辩证关系[J];长春理工大学学报(社会科学版);2014年10期
6 胡建敏;;从语言相对论的角度谈思维与语言的关系[J];语文建设;2014年08期
7 陈文;;萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说——关于语言与思维关系的新思维[J];华中师范大学研究生学报;2013年04期
8 李宏德;;从“二元论”看萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说之语言与思维的关系[J];复旦外国语言文学论丛;2013年01期
9 刘仪蒙;;“萨丕尔-沃尔夫假说”述评[J];现代语文(学术综合版);2013年03期
10 鞠方安;张丽华;;沃尔夫语言相关性思想解读[J];山东外语教学;2013年01期
，本文编号：2405705
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanyishu/2405705.html
