Language has been thought of as being the expression of man’s reason, the result of onomatopoeia, invented as a means of communication, considered basic to the formation of society, or simply a gift of God. Each of these definitions of language has been used in the construction of a multitude of language theories[1]. We shall not be concerned with the development of these theories, but limit ourselves to a discussion of the recurrent emergence of the thoughts on the biological basis of language.
語言被認為是人類理性的一種表達方式，也被認為是一種為了社會形成而去溝通所發明出擬聲詞的結果。或是被認為是神的禮物與恩賜。各種語言的定義被使用來形成了多種的語言理論。 我們不應只關心這些理論的發展過程，而限制了我們去討論經常出現的關於生物基礎語言方面的想法。
語言被認為是人類理性的一種表達方式，也被認為是一種為了社會形成而去溝通所發明出擬聲詞的結果。或是被認為是神的禮物與恩賜。各種語言的定義被使用來形成了多種的語言理論。 我們不應只關心這些理論的發展過程，而限制了我們去討論經常出現的關於生物基礎語言方面的想法。
The idea that language is one of man’s inherent characteristics, like vision or hearing, is found in some myths on the creation of man[2]. In these myths, language is given to man in conjunction with his senses, so that apparently it was considered one of them, and not part of man’s cultural or social functions ( which are also described as given or taught by the gods). By no means can these assertions of a divine origin be considered antithetical to a natural origin of language; on the contrary, everything natural to man was God’s gift to him.
語言是人類與生俱有的特色的想法，就像是視覺或是聽覺。都被發現是有關一些人類起源的神話。在這些神話,語言是跟感官一起給予人類的,所以,語言被認為是感官之一，而非人類文化或社會作用的一部份。(也被認為語言是由神給予或教導的)。這些有關神的起源的主張並不被認為是與語言自然的起源是對立的，相反的，每種人類的天賦都可以說是神的禮物。
Between the realm of mythology and science stands the experiment of the Egyptian King Psammetichos of the seventh century B.C. and related by Herodotus ( fifth century B.C.). Psammetichos suppossedly tried to have two children raised by shepherds who never spoke to them in order to see what language they would develop [3]. This experiment is relevant to our discussion in so far as its design implies the belief that children left to themselves will develop language. Psammetichos thought he would be able to demonstrate which language was the oldest, but apparently did not doubt that even untutored children would speak.
在神話和科學的領域之間存在著西元七世紀前的埃及的國王Psammetichos的實驗，Psammetichos的實驗也和希羅多德有關(西元前五世紀)。 Psammetichos 試著觀察由牧羊人飼養的兩個小孩，在牧羊人不曾跟他們說話的情況下，他們的語言會如何發展。這項實驗跟我們到目前為止的討論有關,到目前為止,他的信仰意味著認為兒童將自己會發展語言。Psammetichos認為他能証明哪一種語言是最古老的,但也顯然堅信即使沒受過教育的兒童仍會說話。
Language first became the subject of discussion by the presocratic philosophers in the latter part of the sixth century B.C. The setting up of antitheses, typical for Greek philosophy, was also applied to the problems which language posed. But discussions of language were limited to a mere consideration of naming and were purely secondary outgrowths of the philosopher’s search for general truths. In order to understand the statements on language made by the Greek philosophers, it is essential to give an idea of the context in which they were made and briefly describe the evolution of the meaning of the two everrecurring terms nomos and physis in which language was to be discussed. Nomos was later replaced by theses and was often wrongly translated as convention while physis has been incorrectly equated with nature.
在西元前六世紀後期，語言已經變成前蘇格拉底哲學家所討論的主題。這種典型的希臘哲學對立的命題也運用到討論語言方面的問題。但有關語言的討論大多侷限於命名的討論，其次哲學家才是在尋找真理。為了瞭解希臘哲學家對語言所做出的陳述，對於去了解他們針對語言所討論到兩個重複出現的術語nomos and physis的意義是很重要的。Nomos也可以說是theses但通常被錯譯為convention，physis也並完全不等於nature.
For Herakleitos (ca. 500 B.C.), nomos was the order regulating the life of society and the individual, but he did not see it as a product of society[4].The nomos of society was valid, but not absolute. Similarly names were valid as they reflected some aspect of the object they named. (Apparently, he did not consider them physis as had been thought)[5]. Physis would have implied that names are an adequate expression of reality or of the true nature of things, an idea to which Herakleitos did not subscribe.
對Herakleitos而言，nomos是由社會與個人所規範的秩序，但他並不了解它也是社會的產物。社會的nomos是正確的但不是絕對的。相似的，名字也是反映出它所命名的物體。(明顯的，他沒有考慮到physis這方面。)Physis可以說是事物的事實或是真實的本質的一種適當的表達方式。這個觀念是Herakleitos不贊成的。
在西元前六世紀後期，語言已經變成前蘇格拉底哲學家所討論的主題。這種典型的希臘哲學對立的命題也運用到討論語言方面的問題。但有關語言的討論大多侷限於命名的討論，其次哲學家才是在尋找真理。為了瞭解希臘哲學家對語言所做出的陳述，對於去了解他們針對語言所討論到兩個重複出現的術語nomos and physis的意義是很重要的。Nomos也可以說是theses但通常被錯譯為convention，physis也並完全不等於nature.
For Herakleitos (ca. 500 B.C.), nomos was the order regulating the life of society and the individual, but he did not see it as a product of society[4].The nomos of society was valid, but not absolute. Similarly names were valid as they reflected some aspect of the object they named. (Apparently, he did not consider them physis as had been thought)[5]. Physis would have implied that names are an adequate expression of reality or of the true nature of things, an idea to which Herakleitos did not subscribe.
對Herakleitos而言，nomos是由社會與個人所規範的秩序，但他並不了解它也是社會的產物。社會的nomos是正確的但不是絕對的。相似的，名字也是反映出它所命名的物體。(明顯的，他沒有考慮到physis這方面。)Physis可以說是事物的事實或是真實的本質的一種適當的表達方式。這個觀念是Herakleitos不贊成的。
相關連結
沒有留言:
張貼留言