Two theories about adjectives
Two theories about adjectives
复制标题
关于形容词的两种理论
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
H. Kamp
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Kamp
我将讨论关于形容词的两个理论。第一种理论可以追溯到20世纪60年代末。Montague（1970）和Parsons（1968）对此进行了阐述。根据这一理论，形容词的意义是一个将名词短语的意义映射到其他这样的意义上的功能;例如，聪明的意义是一个将人的意义映射到聪明人的意义上的功能，狮子狗的意义映射到聪明的狮子狗的意义上的功能，等等。因此，这只狗是聪明的被分析为这只狗是一只聪明的狗--或者这只狗是一只聪明的动物，或者这只狗是一只聪明的动物。在这种表语还原为定语的用法中，应该提供哪个名词短语，一般来说并不完全由句子本身决定，在这种情况下，句子必须被视为模棱两可的。这一学说的主要优点是，它使我们能够在一个精确的自然语言语义学理论（例如蒙塔古的理论）中，以这样一种方式来对待形容词，即某些为假的或很可能为假的句子不会被语义学打上逻辑真的烙印。这类句子的例子有：每一个被指控的小偷都是小偷每一个小象都是小的如果每一个跳蚤都是动物，那么每一个大跳蚤都是大动物。
I will discuss two theories about adjectives. The first theory dates from the late 1960s. It is stated in Montague (1970) and Parsons (1968). According to this theory the meaning of an adjective is a function which maps the meanings of noun phrases onto other such meanings; e.g. the meaning of clever is a function which maps the meaning of man into that of clever man , that of poodle onto that of clever poodle , etc. Predicative uses of adjectives are explained as elliptic attributive uses. Thus This dog is clever is analysed as This dog is a clever dog – or as This dog is a clever animal , or perhaps as This dog is a clever being . Which noun phrase ought to be supplied in this reduction of predicative to attributive use is in general not completely determined by the sentence itself, and to the extent that it is not, the sentence must be regarded as ambiguous. The main virtue of this doctrine is that it enables us to treat, within a precise semantical theory for a natural language – as e.g. that of Montague – adjectives in such a way that certain sentences which are, or might well be, false are not branded by the semantics as logically true. Examples of such sentences are: Every alleged thief is a thief Every small elephant is small If every flea is an animal, then every big flea is a big animal