|
|
|
| The Development of Language from the “Thick” to the “Thin” via the Two Historical Vicissitudes of Latin Language: A Concurrent Discussion on Chinese Language and Philosophy of Chinese |
| Li Zhehan |
| School of Philosophy, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract It is obvious that language is based on human interactions or communications in socio-historical contexts. As a socio-historical phenomenon, language should be viewed through a socio-historical lens rather than through the lens of the inner idling of language itself (which is only a kind of metaphysics of self-reference). Moreover, the role of the language in history is changing based on the process of society towards de-metaphysicalisation, de-ideologisation and positivism. An examination of the historical vicissitudes of language may reveal many underlying important and interesting clues, which are covered by the lens of the inner idling of language itself.Based on Max Weber's methodology of ideal types, we try to develop a framework of theoretical analysis centering on the causal adequacy. In history, sometimes certain values which involve metaphysical or ideological elements are attached to language and some of them are subtracted. Furthermore, the language that are rich in value can be named "thick", and those that are not "thin". Generally speaking, language goes through a process of movement from "thin" to "thick" and then from "thick" back to "thin" in history. This article focuses mainly on the second half of the process (namely from "thick" to "thin"), which goes through a process of de-metaphysicalisation, de-ideologisation and positivisation of both of society and language in general.As a very typical and well-known case in point, two historical vicissitudes of the Latin language play a very important role in explaining this process mentioned above. As being examined in the text, the first rise and fall of the Latin language was accompanied by the rise and fall of the Roman Republic (and Empire later), while the second was based on the rise and fall of the Roman Catholic Church and the after-effects. In addition to external reasons like political, economic, social and religious ones, etc. there are still some internal factors at work such as the complexity and stability of the language itself. As a result of the tendency of de-metaphysicalisation, de-ideologisation and positivisation, the Latin language has inevitably declined and become a kind of "dead" language in the modern world. Its strengths in antiquity have in turn become its weaknesses in the modern times. In this process, some local, national languages began to replace the Latin language within these rising nations. Finally, the English language became the common language (lingua franca) for a number of reasons, such as its practicality and the hegemony of the English-speaking world after World War II.Furthermore, comparing the development of Latin and Chinese in history can help us understand the present state of the Chinese language, and also look to their future. Both understanding and looking are the very important themes of the philosophy of Chinese. Since 1840 the Chinese language has been withdrawing from its old dominant position in the East Asian sphere (the so-called Chinese cultural sphere or Sinosphere), and within these nation states, local, national languages, such as Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese, have risen and replaced the Chinese language. If we try to revive the Chinese language as a common language (lingua franca) in East Asia, and indeed worldwide, we must treat Chinese as a "thin" rather than a "thick" language. The "thick" project actually shares the same logic with the local, national languages, which rose and replaced the Chinese language in these nations. It requires that the Chinese language be more open and flexible by cutting out some of its values in terms of linguistic strategy.
|
|
Received: 03 August 2021
|
|
|
|
1 林远泽： 《从赫德到米德：迈向沟通共同体的德国古典语言哲学思路》，台北：联经出版公司，2019年。
2 List J. M.， Sequence Comparison in Historical Linguistics， Düsseldorf： Düsseldorf University Press， 2014.
3 Collingwood R. G.， An Autobiography， Oxford： Oxford University Press， 1939.
4 Fortson B. W.， “The historical background to Latin within the Indo-European language family，” in Clackson J. （ed.）， A Companion to the Latin Language， Oxford： Blackwell Publishing， 2011， pp. 197-219.
5 信德麟： 《拉丁语和希腊语》，北京：外语教学与研究出版社，2007年。
6 Clackson J. & Horrocks G.， The Blackwell History of the Latin Language， Oxford： Blackwell Publishing， 2007.
7 Clackson J.， “The social dialects of Latin，” in Clackson J. （ed.）， A Companion to the Latin Language， Oxford： Blackwell Publishing， 2011， pp. 503-526.
8 Bruno R.， “Language policies in the Roman republic and empire，” trans. by Clackson J.， in Clackson J. （ed.）， A Companion to the Latin Language， Oxford： Blackwell Publishing， 2011， pp. 549-563.
9 德］于尔根·雷昂哈特： 《拉丁语的故事：一种世界语言的历史》，黄文前、孙晓迪、程雨凡译，太原：山西人民出版社，2021年。
10 张明明： 《罗马尼亚语和拉丁语源流考论——以词汇为中心》，《语言学研究》2018年第1期，第127-134页。
11 法］弗朗索瓦·瓦克： 《拉丁文帝国》，陈绮文译，北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2016年。
12 美］帕特里克·J.格里： 《中世纪早期的语言与权力》，刘林海译，上海：中西书局，2019年。
13 Fruyt M.， “Word-formation in classical Latin，” in Clackson J. （ed.）， A Companion to the Latin Language， Oxford： Blackwell Publishing， 2011， pp. 157-175.
14 Moss A.， Renaissance Truth and the Latin Language Turn， Oxford： Oxford University Press， 2003.
15 郑鸿升： 《俗语不俗——论但丁对俗语的辩护》，《安徽大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2016年第2期，第91-98页。
16 德］弗里德里希·迈内克： 《德国的浩劫》，何兆武译，北京：商务印书馆，2011年。
17 Thornhill C.， A Sociology of Constitutions： Constitutions and State Legitimacy in Historical-Sociological Perspective， Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2011.
18 美］凡勃伦： 《有闲阶级论——关于制度的经济研究》，蔡受百译，北京：商务印书馆，1969年。
19 Ostler N.， Ad Infinitum： A Biography of Latin， New York： Walker & Company， 2007.
20 韩水法： 《汉语哲学：方法论的意义》，《学术月刊》2018年第7期，第5-24页。
21 韩水法： 《汉语哲学：不同的视野不同的路径》，《社会科学报》2016年7月21日，第5版。
22 韩水法： 《东亚的未来：概念·方法·视野——欧盟的借鉴》，《南国学术》2014年第4期，第29-47页。
23 德］尤尔根·哈贝马斯： 《包容他者》，曹卫东译，上海：上海人民出版社，2002年。 |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 53 
