论文部分内容阅读
布尔迪厄实践语义学契合了普特南关于可能的语义学建构需要“一个精确的关于语言使用者的一般模型”的思路。但普特南以语言劳动分工为基础,而布尔迪厄诉诸实践;普特南把意义定义为包含外延在内的向量,继而把决定外延的工作归给了社会,布尔迪厄则把意义界定为价格,而价格取决于语言产品的可接受性。正是这两个区分及其所暗含的社会性视角的深层异质性构成了普特南与布尔迪厄之间的最大差异,也标示了布尔迪厄实践语义学的独特理论风格及其价值所在。
Bourdieu’s practical semantics fit Putnam’s idea of possible semantic construction needs “an accurate general model of language users.” But Putnam was based on the division of labor in languages, and Bourdieu resorted to practice; Putnam defined the meaning as a vector containing the extension, which in turn gave the decision to extend the work to society, and Bourdier put the meaning Defined as price, and the price depends on the acceptability of language products. It is the deep heterogeneity of these two distinctions and their implied social perspectives that make up the largest difference between Putnam and Bourdieu and also mark the unique theoretical style and value of Bourdieu’s practice semantics Where you are.