Conceptual
Meaning
Conceptual Meaning
(sometimes called
"denotative" or
"cognitive" meaning) is
widely assumed to be the
central factor in linguistic
communication.
Conceptual Meaning
it has a complex and sophisticated
organization f a kind which may be
compared with,and cross-related to,
similar organization on the syntactic
and phonological levels of language.
There are two structural
principles that seem to lie at
the basis of all linguistic
patterning,the principle of
contrastiveness and the
princ ip le of s tructure,
The phonetic symbol /b/ may
be explicated as representing a
bundle of contrastive features:
[ +bilabial,+voice,+stop,-nasal]
In a similar way,the conceptual
meanings of a language can be
studied in terms of contrastive
features,so that (for example
) the meaning of the word
"woman" could be specified as
[+human,-male,+adult],as
distinct from,say,boy,which
could be "defined" [+Human,+male,
-adult].
The second principle,
that of structure,is
the princ iple by
w h i c h l a r g e r
linguistic units are
b u i lt up ou t of
s m a l l e r u n i t s,
This aspect of
the organization
of language is
o f t e n g i v e n
visual display in
a tree-diagram:
S
NP VP
Det N V NP
Det N
The man hit the ball
The man hit the ball.
Some of the simplest words harbor
an amazingly explicit set of wayward
traits,Digging them out,classifying
them,and showing their relationships
is termed componential analysis or
feature analysis,and the traits
themselves are semantic features,
which supposedly do the same for
meaning that distinctive features do
for phonology.
The abstract features [+Human
+ Young +Male] have to be
used to analyze a great many
words and accordingly have a
claim to being the kind of
irreducible component that one
hopes to find.
Other words incorporating
[+Young] are child,cub,litter,
calf,sapling,Others with [ +
Male] are boar,gander,stamen,
testosterone,tenor,And others
with [+Human] are corpse (as
against carcass),tresses (as
against mane),tell,talk (as
against bray,cackle,trumpet).
Grammatical classes themselves can be treated
as features of meaning,If we note Smith is a
bigger quack than Jones can mean that Smith is
more of quack,while Smith is a bigger
headshrinker than Jones can refer only to
Smith's size or importance,we can say that
quack "belongs to the class of intensifiable
words," or "has the feature [+Intensifiable]''
(and headshrinker has the feature [-
Intensifiable]),It is a common practice to adopt
these grammatical features as the ones that are
stated first and then add the rest.
So dog might have the display + 名词
+ 强化 - 强化
+ 可数 - 可数
+ 动物 - 动物
+ 犬属
家畜
狗
Some examples will show the great
variety of features that we build into
the words that segment nature in all
its variety.
1).some such feature as,entity
in its own right” is needed to
distinguish disease from
illness and ailment,Diseases
are classified labeled,and a
disease can be,caught”; we
do not ordinarily say catch an
illness or catch an ailment.
2).A feature of,belongingness”
distinguishes to return,when it
takes an object,from to take
back,We took Junior back to
the zoo might refer to letting him
visit the place again,but We
returned Junior to the zoo calls
him an inmate.
3)A feature,enemy”
distinguished U-boat from the
neutral submarine in the First
World War.
4).The verbs to warp and to bend,to kneel and
to genuflect show a contrast in which the first
member of each pair emphasized the retaining
of a condition or a position,something that is
warped stays that way till it is repaired; one
who kneels stays in that position till the
purpose of kneeling ( to pray,to receive the
crown0 is fulfilled,But bending a spring can
be followed by automatic springing back,and
genuflecting normally includes straightening
up again,Some such feature as,goal” or
“completion” is involved in warp and knee.
Features are useful for analysis only if they
are shared---the more widely the better,At
least some of the ones just cited do appear
in other words.,goal”,for instance,is what
distinguishes arrive and reach from leave
and depart,It also distinguishes I went
home from I headed home and I
contributed it from I offered it.
“belongingness” is necessary for steal,
borrow,property bequeath,and trespass.
On the question of how stable a
feature is,take the close
synonyms lonely and lonesome.
Both One lonely person stood up
and protested and One lonesome
person stood up and protested
strike us as inappropriate
for the meaning,one lone
person,” though lonesome
is worse than lonely,
But if on leaving someone a woman
were to say Don’t be lonely,we
would probably take her to mean,go
out and get some company,whereas
Don’t be lonesome could only be a
command to suppress our feelings,A
feature of,aloneness” attaches
tightly to lone and loosely to lonely
but is only inferred with lonesome.
coax,persuade,and convince,It
is our old friend,goal”,which is
clinched with convince,I was
convincing him to go would not
be used except to imply success---
he eventually did go,But with
persuade it depends on the context:
I persuaded him to go implies that
he went,but I was persuading him
to go leaves some doubt.
We cannot say I convinced him and
convinced him but he wouldn’t do it.,
but I persuaded him and persuaded him
but he wouldn’t do it is possible,At the
other extreme,coax tells us nothing
about whether he went,even in I
coaxed him to go,I coaxed him to
go but he wouldn’t is a normal
sentence.
In the set fall,topple,collapse,we
have what appears to be
“unintentionality.” Lacking any
indication to the contrary,we would
assume that Jane fell meant that it
happened without her intending it.
Yet this feature is not permanently
stuck to fall,though it is to the two
other verbs,we can say She fell on
purpose but not She toppled on
purpose,Topple is completely
unintentional,fall is just mostly so.
语义的确定与不确定是相对的。语
义的不确定性首先表现为语义的模
糊性。 人类的历史是人类不断认识
世界的历史，也是人类对, 认识,
认识的历史。在认识的早期阶段，
人们几乎总是从, 命运,,, 必然,
等角度去寻求一切客观事物的确定
性，总是试图从排中律和二值逻辑
的基础上去认识和构建错综复杂的
客观世界。 这种对确定性的追求曾
经是衡量科学的唯一的价值尺度。
随着人们对, 认识, 认识的不断提
高，人类发现，曾经被认为是, 非 A
即 B”的关系只是人类主观的、理想
化的关系。人们认识世界的有效性、
多样性、深刻性并不总是与确定精
确的认识形式相联系，模糊思维形
式是人类认识世界、理解世界和改
造世界的重要手段之一。
数学, 哲学, 逻辑学, 现
代理论物理对客观世界模
糊性的研究使人类对精确
性和模糊性的本质有着更
为深刻的理解, 使人们认
识到精确性是有条件的,
因而是相对的 。 模糊性寓
于精确性之中, 精确性只
是模糊性的特殊表现 。
目前在国内学术界普遍存在着对语义
模糊性的, 客观主义, 的观点 。 根据
客观论, 语义的模糊性是对客观事物
内在模糊性的反映 。
以颜色为例,颜色是人目视觉的基本
特征之一 。 不同波长的可见光引起
人目不同的颜色感觉, 大致可划分
如下,
红 7,700 ? ---6,220?
橙 6,220 ? ---5,970?
黄 5,970 ? ---5,770?
绿 5,770 ? ---4,920?
蓝 --靛 4,920 ? ---4,550?
紫 4,550 ? ---3,900?
从以上的划分可以看出各色之间是连
续变化的。在颜色的连续体中我们很
难找到一个点使红和橙，橙和黄，黄
和绿，绿和蓝以及蓝和紫截然分开。
如果在红与橙之间再划分桃红、粉
红、铁锈红、紫红、绯红、砖红、
水红、朱红、栗红、猩红、胭脂红、
洋红就更难以, 非 A即 B”的排中律
对
色彩进行定性。语义的模糊性是
对客观世界的模糊性的再现。
另一种观点认为, 语义的模糊性
关系到主体对对象类属边界, 性
态的把握, 其测度与主体密切相
关, 因而是主观的 。
以英语中的, bald”为例,Webster?s
New Collegiate Dictionary 把它定
义为：,lacking a natural or usual
covering as of hair,vegetation,etc.),
但问题是如何去量化, bald“的
值使之达到 natural或
usual的值呢？ natural或
usual的值又是什么呢？
对于一个连续体上的两个极
端端点的确立有时并不困难。
如果一个人的头上一根头发
也没有，我们会毫不迟疑地
说,"He is bald."，但是如果
他的头上有一根头发呢？或
许我们还会使用 "bald"。如果
他的头上有两根，三根，四
根 …… 以此类推，我们还会
使用 "bald"一词吗？
如果我们把 "bald"和 "not
bald"的分界值人为地定在
100根, 那么, 这就意味着
头上有 99根头发的人是
"bald",而头上有 101根头发
的人是 "not bald"。 如果我
们这样做, 这种主观的划
分 将 是 荒 唐 可 笑 的 。
事实上，语义的模糊性和精确
性只有与人的认识相联系才有意义。客
观世界本身无所谓精确和模糊。无论它
是精确的还是模糊的都会以其特有的规
律运动着，而人的认识却有, 知, 与
,不 知,,以及, 知多, 和, 知少,
的问题，因此精确性和模糊性属于认识
论的范畴。
语义的确定与不确定，精确与模糊则是
相对的。它们在不同的历史阶段中的不
同的人类的认知场中会有不同的界定，
因此也只具有暂时的正确性。早期人类
赋予太阳的意义是, 围绕地球转的天
体,,而且在当时人的认知场中这一结
论也是可以得到证实的，因为人们依据
这一理论可以成功地预测日食和月食的
发生。随着人类认知场的不断扩展，这
一理论最终被推翻，从而建立了地球围
绕太阳转的学说,
中国有个, 盲人摸象, 的寓言, 旨在讽刺
看待问题片面的人 。 但是人类对确定性和
精确性的追求也正是, 盲人摸象, 的过程 。
对于客观世界这个, 大象,, 人们在特定
的认知场结构的框架中, 总是对, 大象,
的某个部分进行有限的了解, 而且从不同
的角度入手, 会得出不同的自认为确定的
结论, 而当人类的认知场发生变化时, 曾
经是确定的又变成不确定的了 。
换句话说，精确是相对的，是对对
象静止状态的把握，模糊是绝对的，
是对象动态本质的真实再现。可以
说，精确是模糊的特殊的表现形式。
人类认识客观世界的过程就是如此。
模糊性是模糊语言学的关注
对象。它涉及对象类属边界
不清晰和形态不确定的特征。
客观世界并不是由彼此独立、
互不关联的个体事物相加的
总和，而是由无数的连续体
交织而成。它们之间的关系
错综复杂，纵横交错，彼此
之间相互影响，相互作用，
形成运动的连续体 。
从表面上看, 处于连续体两端的两个事
物的本质差别似乎容易识别, 但是处于
同一个连续体中相互比邻的事物之间的
界限往往模糊不清, 很难找出它们之间
本质性的差异 。 对立的两极总是相互渗
透, 你中有我, 我中有你, 形成一系列
的中介链, 使两极对立的绝对性消失,
因此也就不可能存在泾渭分明的界限 。
,一切差异都在中间阶段融合, 一切对
立都在中间环节互相过渡, 。
Example:
wet and dry
当我们说,It is wet.或 It is dry.时,
在我们脑海中往往形成 p∨ ~p这样
一种关系 。 但是客观世界的真实
情况又可能是怎样的呢？ 如果我
们把 wet 和 dry 放在一个, 湿度,
的连续体中来考察, 情况就有可
能不同：
语义的确定性和不确定性只有与
人的认识相联系才有意义。客观世
界本身无所谓确定或不确定，而人
的认识却有, 知, 与, 不知,,以
及, 知多, 和, 知少, 的问题，因
此确定性性和不确定性属于认识论
的范畴。
在哲学界和语言学界何谓, 意义,
是一个争论不休的问题，不同的学
派从不同的角度都对意义进行了各
种界定。如果说客观事物的类属边
界不清晰和形态不确定导致了词义
的模糊性，那么一个话语是否有意
义同样存在类属边界不清晰性或不
确定性，同样涉及到人的主体对话
语的认识,
1,Came the into yesterday he classroom.
2.He switched on the blanket and slept.
3,He slept standing on one toe.
4.He slept awake.
5,He turned on the clothes.
“经验世界, 在解析意义中的优先地位 。
但是人们对经验世界的理解会存在的量
与质的差异 。 对经验世界认识上的差异
导致对话语意义性的不同的价值判断 。
一个符合语言系统的话语是否有意义首
先要看它是否反映了, 经验世界,, 是
否与人们对, 经验世界, 的认识相吻合 。
事实上学生在判断以上例句是否有意义在
一定的程度上反映了他们经验世界的差异。
一些学生认为例 2）无意义是因为, 毯,
子可通电不是, 毯, 子的缺省信息，因此
他们没能把, 毯子, 和客观世界中的, 电
热毯, 联系起来，另一部分同学认为例 2）
有意义是因为在客观世界中确实存在着一
种, 可通电, 的毯子，即：, 电热毯, 。
2.He switched on the blanket and slept.
绝大多数同学认为例 3）违背了客
观世界中普遍存在的客观现象，它
所描绘的睡姿不是, sleep”缺省
信息中所包含的，因此无意义。
3,He slept standing on one toe.
许多同学都认为例 4）比例 3）更
不可信，它表达了一种在客观世
界中无法存在的现象,
4.He slept awake.
例 5）没有意义是因为在当今的经
验世界中，还没有此种
,衣服, 。
5,He turned on the clothes.
但是对意义的解析虽然以经验世界为优
先参照, 但是经验世界不是唯一参照 。
当学生被要求去创造一种语境使得以上
的话语有着合理的意义时, 笔者发现学
生会在, 可能的世界, 或, 假想的世界,
中寻求对话语语义的解析 。 在话语意义
的, 适从向, （ direction of fit） 上存在
使话语意义符合, 可能世界, 或, 假想
世界,, 或使, 可能世界, 符合, 话语
意义, 的倾向 。
Meaning
Conceptual Meaning
(sometimes called
"denotative" or
"cognitive" meaning) is
widely assumed to be the
central factor in linguistic
communication.
Conceptual Meaning
it has a complex and sophisticated
organization f a kind which may be
compared with,and cross-related to,
similar organization on the syntactic
and phonological levels of language.
There are two structural
principles that seem to lie at
the basis of all linguistic
patterning,the principle of
contrastiveness and the
princ ip le of s tructure,
The phonetic symbol /b/ may
be explicated as representing a
bundle of contrastive features:
[ +bilabial,+voice,+stop,-nasal]
In a similar way,the conceptual
meanings of a language can be
studied in terms of contrastive
features,so that (for example
) the meaning of the word
"woman" could be specified as
[+human,-male,+adult],as
distinct from,say,boy,which
could be "defined" [+Human,+male,
-adult].
The second principle,
that of structure,is
the princ iple by
w h i c h l a r g e r
linguistic units are
b u i lt up ou t of
s m a l l e r u n i t s,
This aspect of
the organization
of language is
o f t e n g i v e n
visual display in
a tree-diagram:
S
NP VP
Det N V NP
Det N
The man hit the ball
The man hit the ball.
Some of the simplest words harbor
an amazingly explicit set of wayward
traits,Digging them out,classifying
them,and showing their relationships
is termed componential analysis or
feature analysis,and the traits
themselves are semantic features,
which supposedly do the same for
meaning that distinctive features do
for phonology.
The abstract features [+Human
+ Young +Male] have to be
used to analyze a great many
words and accordingly have a
claim to being the kind of
irreducible component that one
hopes to find.
Other words incorporating
[+Young] are child,cub,litter,
calf,sapling,Others with [ +
Male] are boar,gander,stamen,
testosterone,tenor,And others
with [+Human] are corpse (as
against carcass),tresses (as
against mane),tell,talk (as
against bray,cackle,trumpet).
Grammatical classes themselves can be treated
as features of meaning,If we note Smith is a
bigger quack than Jones can mean that Smith is
more of quack,while Smith is a bigger
headshrinker than Jones can refer only to
Smith's size or importance,we can say that
quack "belongs to the class of intensifiable
words," or "has the feature [+Intensifiable]''
(and headshrinker has the feature [-
Intensifiable]),It is a common practice to adopt
these grammatical features as the ones that are
stated first and then add the rest.
So dog might have the display + 名词
+ 强化 - 强化
+ 可数 - 可数
+ 动物 - 动物
+ 犬属
家畜
狗
Some examples will show the great
variety of features that we build into
the words that segment nature in all
its variety.
1).some such feature as,entity
in its own right” is needed to
distinguish disease from
illness and ailment,Diseases
are classified labeled,and a
disease can be,caught”; we
do not ordinarily say catch an
illness or catch an ailment.
2).A feature of,belongingness”
distinguishes to return,when it
takes an object,from to take
back,We took Junior back to
the zoo might refer to letting him
visit the place again,but We
returned Junior to the zoo calls
him an inmate.
3)A feature,enemy”
distinguished U-boat from the
neutral submarine in the First
World War.
4).The verbs to warp and to bend,to kneel and
to genuflect show a contrast in which the first
member of each pair emphasized the retaining
of a condition or a position,something that is
warped stays that way till it is repaired; one
who kneels stays in that position till the
purpose of kneeling ( to pray,to receive the
crown0 is fulfilled,But bending a spring can
be followed by automatic springing back,and
genuflecting normally includes straightening
up again,Some such feature as,goal” or
“completion” is involved in warp and knee.
Features are useful for analysis only if they
are shared---the more widely the better,At
least some of the ones just cited do appear
in other words.,goal”,for instance,is what
distinguishes arrive and reach from leave
and depart,It also distinguishes I went
home from I headed home and I
contributed it from I offered it.
“belongingness” is necessary for steal,
borrow,property bequeath,and trespass.
On the question of how stable a
feature is,take the close
synonyms lonely and lonesome.
Both One lonely person stood up
and protested and One lonesome
person stood up and protested
strike us as inappropriate
for the meaning,one lone
person,” though lonesome
is worse than lonely,
But if on leaving someone a woman
were to say Don’t be lonely,we
would probably take her to mean,go
out and get some company,whereas
Don’t be lonesome could only be a
command to suppress our feelings,A
feature of,aloneness” attaches
tightly to lone and loosely to lonely
but is only inferred with lonesome.
coax,persuade,and convince,It
is our old friend,goal”,which is
clinched with convince,I was
convincing him to go would not
be used except to imply success---
he eventually did go,But with
persuade it depends on the context:
I persuaded him to go implies that
he went,but I was persuading him
to go leaves some doubt.
We cannot say I convinced him and
convinced him but he wouldn’t do it.,
but I persuaded him and persuaded him
but he wouldn’t do it is possible,At the
other extreme,coax tells us nothing
about whether he went,even in I
coaxed him to go,I coaxed him to
go but he wouldn’t is a normal
sentence.
In the set fall,topple,collapse,we
have what appears to be
“unintentionality.” Lacking any
indication to the contrary,we would
assume that Jane fell meant that it
happened without her intending it.
Yet this feature is not permanently
stuck to fall,though it is to the two
other verbs,we can say She fell on
purpose but not She toppled on
purpose,Topple is completely
unintentional,fall is just mostly so.
语义的确定与不确定是相对的。语
义的不确定性首先表现为语义的模
糊性。 人类的历史是人类不断认识
世界的历史，也是人类对, 认识,
认识的历史。在认识的早期阶段，
人们几乎总是从, 命运,,, 必然,
等角度去寻求一切客观事物的确定
性，总是试图从排中律和二值逻辑
的基础上去认识和构建错综复杂的
客观世界。 这种对确定性的追求曾
经是衡量科学的唯一的价值尺度。
随着人们对, 认识, 认识的不断提
高，人类发现，曾经被认为是, 非 A
即 B”的关系只是人类主观的、理想
化的关系。人们认识世界的有效性、
多样性、深刻性并不总是与确定精
确的认识形式相联系，模糊思维形
式是人类认识世界、理解世界和改
造世界的重要手段之一。
数学, 哲学, 逻辑学, 现
代理论物理对客观世界模
糊性的研究使人类对精确
性和模糊性的本质有着更
为深刻的理解, 使人们认
识到精确性是有条件的,
因而是相对的 。 模糊性寓
于精确性之中, 精确性只
是模糊性的特殊表现 。
目前在国内学术界普遍存在着对语义
模糊性的, 客观主义, 的观点 。 根据
客观论, 语义的模糊性是对客观事物
内在模糊性的反映 。
以颜色为例,颜色是人目视觉的基本
特征之一 。 不同波长的可见光引起
人目不同的颜色感觉, 大致可划分
如下,
红 7,700 ? ---6,220?
橙 6,220 ? ---5,970?
黄 5,970 ? ---5,770?
绿 5,770 ? ---4,920?
蓝 --靛 4,920 ? ---4,550?
紫 4,550 ? ---3,900?
从以上的划分可以看出各色之间是连
续变化的。在颜色的连续体中我们很
难找到一个点使红和橙，橙和黄，黄
和绿，绿和蓝以及蓝和紫截然分开。
如果在红与橙之间再划分桃红、粉
红、铁锈红、紫红、绯红、砖红、
水红、朱红、栗红、猩红、胭脂红、
洋红就更难以, 非 A即 B”的排中律
对
色彩进行定性。语义的模糊性是
对客观世界的模糊性的再现。
另一种观点认为, 语义的模糊性
关系到主体对对象类属边界, 性
态的把握, 其测度与主体密切相
关, 因而是主观的 。
以英语中的, bald”为例,Webster?s
New Collegiate Dictionary 把它定
义为：,lacking a natural or usual
covering as of hair,vegetation,etc.),
但问题是如何去量化, bald“的
值使之达到 natural或
usual的值呢？ natural或
usual的值又是什么呢？
对于一个连续体上的两个极
端端点的确立有时并不困难。
如果一个人的头上一根头发
也没有，我们会毫不迟疑地
说,"He is bald."，但是如果
他的头上有一根头发呢？或
许我们还会使用 "bald"。如果
他的头上有两根，三根，四
根 …… 以此类推，我们还会
使用 "bald"一词吗？
如果我们把 "bald"和 "not
bald"的分界值人为地定在
100根, 那么, 这就意味着
头上有 99根头发的人是
"bald",而头上有 101根头发
的人是 "not bald"。 如果我
们这样做, 这种主观的划
分 将 是 荒 唐 可 笑 的 。
事实上，语义的模糊性和精确
性只有与人的认识相联系才有意义。客
观世界本身无所谓精确和模糊。无论它
是精确的还是模糊的都会以其特有的规
律运动着，而人的认识却有, 知, 与
,不 知,,以及, 知多, 和, 知少,
的问题，因此精确性和模糊性属于认识
论的范畴。
语义的确定与不确定，精确与模糊则是
相对的。它们在不同的历史阶段中的不
同的人类的认知场中会有不同的界定，
因此也只具有暂时的正确性。早期人类
赋予太阳的意义是, 围绕地球转的天
体,,而且在当时人的认知场中这一结
论也是可以得到证实的，因为人们依据
这一理论可以成功地预测日食和月食的
发生。随着人类认知场的不断扩展，这
一理论最终被推翻，从而建立了地球围
绕太阳转的学说,
中国有个, 盲人摸象, 的寓言, 旨在讽刺
看待问题片面的人 。 但是人类对确定性和
精确性的追求也正是, 盲人摸象, 的过程 。
对于客观世界这个, 大象,, 人们在特定
的认知场结构的框架中, 总是对, 大象,
的某个部分进行有限的了解, 而且从不同
的角度入手, 会得出不同的自认为确定的
结论, 而当人类的认知场发生变化时, 曾
经是确定的又变成不确定的了 。
换句话说，精确是相对的，是对对
象静止状态的把握，模糊是绝对的，
是对象动态本质的真实再现。可以
说，精确是模糊的特殊的表现形式。
人类认识客观世界的过程就是如此。
模糊性是模糊语言学的关注
对象。它涉及对象类属边界
不清晰和形态不确定的特征。
客观世界并不是由彼此独立、
互不关联的个体事物相加的
总和，而是由无数的连续体
交织而成。它们之间的关系
错综复杂，纵横交错，彼此
之间相互影响，相互作用，
形成运动的连续体 。
从表面上看, 处于连续体两端的两个事
物的本质差别似乎容易识别, 但是处于
同一个连续体中相互比邻的事物之间的
界限往往模糊不清, 很难找出它们之间
本质性的差异 。 对立的两极总是相互渗
透, 你中有我, 我中有你, 形成一系列
的中介链, 使两极对立的绝对性消失,
因此也就不可能存在泾渭分明的界限 。
,一切差异都在中间阶段融合, 一切对
立都在中间环节互相过渡, 。
Example:
wet and dry
当我们说,It is wet.或 It is dry.时,
在我们脑海中往往形成 p∨ ~p这样
一种关系 。 但是客观世界的真实
情况又可能是怎样的呢？ 如果我
们把 wet 和 dry 放在一个, 湿度,
的连续体中来考察, 情况就有可
能不同：
语义的确定性和不确定性只有与
人的认识相联系才有意义。客观世
界本身无所谓确定或不确定，而人
的认识却有, 知, 与, 不知,,以
及, 知多, 和, 知少, 的问题，因
此确定性性和不确定性属于认识论
的范畴。
在哲学界和语言学界何谓, 意义,
是一个争论不休的问题，不同的学
派从不同的角度都对意义进行了各
种界定。如果说客观事物的类属边
界不清晰和形态不确定导致了词义
的模糊性，那么一个话语是否有意
义同样存在类属边界不清晰性或不
确定性，同样涉及到人的主体对话
语的认识,
1,Came the into yesterday he classroom.
2.He switched on the blanket and slept.
3,He slept standing on one toe.
4.He slept awake.
5,He turned on the clothes.
“经验世界, 在解析意义中的优先地位 。
但是人们对经验世界的理解会存在的量
与质的差异 。 对经验世界认识上的差异
导致对话语意义性的不同的价值判断 。
一个符合语言系统的话语是否有意义首
先要看它是否反映了, 经验世界,, 是
否与人们对, 经验世界, 的认识相吻合 。
事实上学生在判断以上例句是否有意义在
一定的程度上反映了他们经验世界的差异。
一些学生认为例 2）无意义是因为, 毯,
子可通电不是, 毯, 子的缺省信息，因此
他们没能把, 毯子, 和客观世界中的, 电
热毯, 联系起来，另一部分同学认为例 2）
有意义是因为在客观世界中确实存在着一
种, 可通电, 的毯子，即：, 电热毯, 。
2.He switched on the blanket and slept.
绝大多数同学认为例 3）违背了客
观世界中普遍存在的客观现象，它
所描绘的睡姿不是, sleep”缺省
信息中所包含的，因此无意义。
3,He slept standing on one toe.
许多同学都认为例 4）比例 3）更
不可信，它表达了一种在客观世
界中无法存在的现象,
4.He slept awake.
例 5）没有意义是因为在当今的经
验世界中，还没有此种
,衣服, 。
5,He turned on the clothes.
但是对意义的解析虽然以经验世界为优
先参照, 但是经验世界不是唯一参照 。
当学生被要求去创造一种语境使得以上
的话语有着合理的意义时, 笔者发现学
生会在, 可能的世界, 或, 假想的世界,
中寻求对话语语义的解析 。 在话语意义
的, 适从向, （ direction of fit） 上存在
使话语意义符合, 可能世界, 或, 假想
世界,, 或使, 可能世界, 符合, 话语
意义, 的倾向 。
