Introduction to special issue: ‘the ordinariness of translinguistics’
Introduction to special issue: ‘the ordinariness of translinguistics’
复制标题
特刊简介：“跨语言学的平凡性”
DOI：
10.1080/14790718.2019.1575831
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
2.3
通讯作者：
J. Lee
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sender Dovchin;J. Lee
传奇人物赫拉克利特声称：“我们踏入和不踏入同一条河流，我们存在和不存在”，这到底是什么意思？当然，赫拉克利特被称为“谜语人”，他用多层意义和复杂性来填充和过滤他的文字，这些意义和复杂性就像谜语或谜题一样需要解决。根据巴恩斯（Barnes，1982）的说法，赫拉克利特是一个“物质一元论者”，他相信一切都在流动，从某种意义上说，“一切在某些方面总是流动的”（第69页;强调原文）。简单地说，一切都在变化，没有什么是不变的。赫拉克利特通过克里安忒斯的一个演绎被认为是赫拉克利特流传下来的最可靠的来源之一：“那些踏入河流的人保持着同样的其他和其他的沃茨流”（格雷厄姆，2015）。如果克里安提斯的引文被认为是权威性的，那么在我们看来，主要的哲学结论似乎是“河流保持不变”，而“水不一样”。对我们来说，“同一条河流”和“其他沃茨”之间的相关性很有意义：我们可以说一个物体--“一条河流”--可能会“改变”，但它也可能只通过改变它的组成部分--“其他水域”--而保持原样。换句话说，“其他沃茨”在某种程度上可能是“相同的”，因为如果它们完全不同，就根本不会有“河流”（格雷厄姆，2015）。当然，作为人类，我们可以理性地区分保持不变的特征和变化的特征。尽管如此，这两个特征应该注定在一起，因为我们在本期特刊中认为“同一件事会发生变化”。正如Graham（2015）通过Cleanthes阅读Heraclitus，
What did the legendary Heraclitus actually mean when he claimed, ‘We step and we do not step into the same rivers, we are and we are not’? Heraclitus was, of course, known as ‘The Riddler’, filling and filthening his words with multiple tiers of meaning and complexities that were to be solved like riddles or puzzles. According to Barnes (1982), Heraclitus was a ‘material monist’, who believed that everything was in flux, in the sense that ‘everything was always flowing in some respects’ (p. 69; emphasis in original). Simply, all is in flux, and nothing stays the same. A rendition of Heraclitus via Cleanthes is known as one of the most reliable sources passed down from Heraclitus: ‘On those stepping into rivers staying the same other and other waters flow’ (Graham, 2015). If Cleanthes’s quotation is to be recognised as authoritative, the main philosophical conclusion seems to us that ‘the river stays the same’while ‘the water does not’. To us, the correlation between ‘same rivers’ and ‘other waters’makes good sense: we can say an object – ‘a river’ –may ‘change’, but it may also remain what it is by only changing what it comprises – ‘other waters’. Put differently, ‘other waters’ might be ‘the same’ in a certain way, because if they were entirely different, there would be no ‘river’ at all (Graham, 2015). We, as human beings, of course, may rationally distinguish between the features that remain the same and those that change. These two features, nonetheless, should be destined together, because we argue in this special issue that ‘the same thing changes.’ As Graham (2015) reads Heraclitus through Cleanthes,