期刊文献+

试析论证研究中语境及社会性因素的介入——从语用论辩术的理论视角看 被引量:6

An Analysis of the Incorporation of Contextual and Social Factors in Argumentation Study:From the Perspective of Pragma-dialectics
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 由于逻辑进路下的论证研究在还原形式论证的过程中会忽略掉主体性、社会文化性、目的性和语境依赖性等重要特征,从而无法全面描述并恰当评价作为一种社会活动的论证。为解决这一问题,本文尝试从语用论辩术的理论视角出发,分析如何将语境及社会性因素纳入论证研究。首先,说明该视角下的论证分析是一种关注于语言使用的功能分析;其次,对作为社会性因素的用法惯例展开讨论;继而,分析语境因素如何介入讨论规则;最后,阐释如何将不确定的微观语境因素和确定的宏观语境因素纳入论证的重构、分析与评价之中。 With the perspective of traditional logic approaches for argumentation study, some important characters such as agency, socio-cultural nature, purposefulness and context- dependency may be ignored in the process of form-reducing. And consequently, the ar- gumentation as one kind of social activities can not be either comprehensively described or properly evaluated. In order to solve the very problems, this paper makes a tentative attempt to analyze how the contextual and social factors could be incorporated into the argumentation study with the theory of pragma-dialectics. To start with, on concerning the usage of language, I shall clarify that the argumentation analysis should be regarded as a functional analysis (with the approach ofpragma-dialectics). Secondly, I shall make a further discussion on the conventions of usage (which are deemed as social elements). In addition, the manners of including the contextual factors into the discussion rules will be shown up as well. Finally, I shall illustrate how both the ingredients of indeterminate micro-context and the determined macro-context could be incorporated into the recon-struction, analysis and evaluation.
作者 陈彦瑾
出处 《逻辑学研究》 CSSCI 2012年第4期61-76,共16页 Studies in Logic
基金 教育部哲学社会科学2010年度重大攻关项目(10JZD0006) 教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地2010年度重大项目(10JJD720009) 国家社科基金2011年度青年项目(11CZX044)成果
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1P.Grice. Logic and conversation[A].London,UK:Academic Press,1975.41-58.
  • 2A.G.Hamiltom. Logic for Mathematicians[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,1987.
  • 3C.Perelman,L.Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric:A Treatise on Argumentation,2nded”[M].Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press,1971.
  • 4N.Rescher. Introduction to Logic[M].New York:St.Martin's Press,1964.
  • 5J.R.Searle. What is a speech act[A].Oxford:Oxford University Press,1965.39-53.
  • 6J.R.Searle. Indirect speech acts[A].London,UK:Academic Press,1975.59-82.
  • 7J.R.Searle. A taxonomy of illocutionary acts[A].Minneapolis:University of Minnersota Press,1975.344-369.
  • 8F.H.van Eemeren,R.Grootendorst. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions:ATheoretical Model for Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion[M].Dordrecht:Foris,1984.
  • 9F.H.van Eemeren,R.Grootendorst,T.Kruiger. Handbook of Argumentation Theory:A Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies[M].Dordrecht:Foris,1987.
  • 10F.H.van Eemeren,R.Grootendorst. Argumentation,Communication,and Fallacies:aPragma-dialectical Perspective[M].Hillsdale,New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,1992.

二级参考文献73

  • 1任平,欧阳康,冯平,鞠实儿.当代哲学研究的前沿问题(续):马克思“反思的问题视域”及其当代意义[J].中国社会科学,2006(6):35-40. 被引量:57
  • 2谢耘.论证,论辩,争论——当代论证理论视域中论证概念的双重维度解读[J].自然辩证法研究,2007,23(4):26-30. 被引量:12
  • 3Plato, Theaetetus, translated with notes by John McDowell, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973.
  • 4Witt~enstein, Philosophical Investigations, 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 2001, pp. 68, 43.
  • 5肖尔兹.《简明逻辑史》,张家龙、吴可译,北京:商务印书馆,1977年,第6-25页.
  • 6J. A. Mortimer, "Logic, " in Great Books of the Western World, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 1990, pp. 798-810.
  • 7Susan Haack, Deviant Logic, Fuzzy Logic: Beyond the Formalism, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 1996, pp. 26-35.
  • 8托马斯·许兰德·埃里克森.《小地方,大论题一--社会文化人类学导论》,董薇译,北京:商务印书馆,2008年,第10页.
  • 9舍尔巴次基.《佛教逻辑》,宋力道等译,北京:商务印书馆,1997年,第1-2、365-368页.
  • 10亚里士多德.《工具论》,余纪元译,北京:中国人民大学出版社,2003年.

共引文献161

同被引文献61

引证文献6

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部