文法,意味,論理の接点 : 山根和平氏「関数としての文構造」批判を中心に

機関リポジトリ Web Site

書誌事項

タイトル別名
  • ブンポウ , イミ , ロンリ ノ セッテン ヤマネ ワヘイ シ カンスウ ト シテ ノ ブン コウゾウ テツガク 50 , 51ゴウ ショサイ ヒハン オ チュウシン ニ
  • ブンポウ, イミ, ロンリ ノ セッテン : ヤマネ ワヘイ シ 「カンスウ トシテ ノ ブン コウゾウ」 ヒハン オ チュウシン ニ
  • Bunpo, imi, ronri no setten : Yamane Wahei shi "Kansu toshite no bun kozo" hihan o chushin ni
  • Grammar, Meaning and Logic : A Critical Review of Mr. Yamane's Paper:"Sentence Structure as a Function"

この論文をさがす

説明

type:text

Mr. Yamane has discussed the problem of grammar, meaning and logic in his two recent papers: "The Problem of Meaning (I)," Tetsugaku (Mita), vol. 50 (1967), pp. 129-149, "Sentence Structure as a Function," Tetsugaku (Mita), vol. 51, (1967) pp. 127-140. The essential points of his argument are as follows: the grammatical structure of a sentence analyzed by the transformational grammar cannot reveal its logical structure in the sense of modern symbolic logic, for this type of analysis is affected by the old-fashioned concept of subject-predicate bifurcation of a sentence. Claiming to correct such a defect, Mr. Yamane proposes a revision of the syntactic rules employing the notion of propositional function. As a result of this revision he insists that the structural meaning of a sentence will become clearer. In this paper I criticize his argument in the following way. In Chapter I, I present some fundamental points of the method of generative grammar, which will serve to make my standpoint clear. In Chapter II, I examine his rules in detail and point out several crucial faults which affect the semantic interpretation of a sentence. I conclude that his revised rules serve nothing for making the structural meaning of a sentence clearer. In Chapter III, I discuss the philosophical motivation of Mr. Yamane's proposal. He pretends to adopt R1':S→Fx, Gxy, Hxyz,…, instead of R1:S→NP+VP in the Phrase Structure Rules of Syntax. Which of these rules should we adopt? This problem cannot be solved a priori but only empirically, since the degree of success in a grammatical description of language is determined by the appropriateness of the actual data in terms of lingusitically significant generalization. He thinks that the subject-predicate analysis of a sentence is inherent to the generative grammar, and that his proposal is a fundamental revision of the entire system. But this is a misconception. Regrettably this kind of misconception is widely seen among the analytic philosophers of today.

序言 第I章. 生成文法理論の方法 第II章. 山根氏モデルに対する技術的側面よりの批判 第III章. 山根氏モデルの哲学的背景に対する批判

収録刊行物

  • 哲學

    哲學 52 73-152, 1968-03

    三田哲學會

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ