论文部分内容阅读
１９世纪后期．经典物理学的各个分支已发展为月整的逻辑演绎体系，从而隐含着语言翻译问题。批判学派的哲人科学家敏锐地洞察到这个论题，发出了时代的先声。马赫强调语语言在科学交流和思维中的价值，似乎认为科学可用日常语言描述。彭加勤认为科学事实是语言的约定，它只不过是翻译成方便语言的未加工的事实而已；翻译的可能性隐含着不变性，这种不变性是未加工的事实之间的关系．迪昂在世纪之交对科学中的语言翻译论述得最为详尽和深入：翻译存在于科学的起点和终点．实际事实和科学事实之间的互译并非—一对应，翻译即背叛，测量是词典．实验需诠释，诠释非翻译．８０年代库恩明确区分了翻译与诠释，探讨了词典的形成、结构和功能，分析了保真翻译不可能和诠释赖以进行的桥头堡；这一切颇有新意，在某种程度上是对迪昂的“回应”。文章最后针对有关问题作了简短的评论。
Late 19th century. Various branches of classical physics have developed into monthly logical deduction system, which implies a language translation problem. The philosopher-scientists of the critical school were keenly aware of the topic and issued the first sound of the times. Mach emphasizes the value of language in science exchange and thinking, and seems to think that science can be described in everyday language. Peng Jiaqin thinks that scientific fact is a language agreement, it is nothing more than an unprocessed fact of translation into a convenient language; the possibility of translation implies invariance, which is the relationship between raw facts. At the turn of the century, Dion expounded the most exhaustive and in-depth discussion of language translation in science: translation exists at the beginning and end of science. The translation between the actual facts and the scientific facts is not - one correspondence, translation is betrayal, measurement is a dictionary. Experiments need interpretation, interpretation of non-translation. Kuhn made a clear distinction between translation and interpretation in the 1980s, explored the formation, structure and function of dictionaries, and analyzed the bridgeheads in which fidelity translation was impossible and its interpretation was carried out. All this was quite new and in some ways, Angry “response.” The article concludes with a brief comment on the issue.