Studies in usage of evaluative adverbials of the classical languages and the theory of action and value

1.本研究的特色在于从语言学的角度来思考行为论和价值论的问题，回顾古典语言中评价状语的用法。所讨论的状语同时修饰施者和行为；因此，通过对这些状语的回顾，我们可以得到一种新的行动与价值理论，它统一了行动与施者的评价观点。2.首先，我们证实了柏拉图和其他同时代作家对副词用法的共同理解；我们认识到，亚里士多德从来没有把副词用作句子副词，他也从来没有注意到对话词、形容词和介词加上抽象名词短语之间的对应关系，而柏拉图在他的早期和中期对话录中对这一点给予了很大的关注。3.接下来，我们研究了希腊化的行为和价值哲学以及希腊化哲学家对评价状语的使用。最终，我们可以说，在亚里士多德死后，行动与价值理论的结构发生了巨大的变化，这与这一时期对状语用法的“共同理解”丢失不无关系；通过欧洲人文主义的传统，我们间接地从希腊哲学中继承了行动和价值理论，这在很多方面都是有问题的。我们现在必须从我们所达到的新立场重新考虑理解人类行为和价值的希腊传统。

1.It is characteristic of this study to consider the problems concerning the theory of action and value from a linguistic atandpoint, reviewing usage of evaluative adverbials of the classical languages. The adverbials in question modify both agent and action at the same time ; so we can obtain, from the review of those adverbials, a new theory of action and value which unifies evaluative points of view of acion and agent. 2.First, we certified what the common understanging of adverbial usage was between Plato and other contemporary writers ; and we recognized that Aristotle never had used advebials as sentence-advebials, and that he never had given attention to the correspondences between advervials, ajectives, and preposition plus abstract noun phrases, to which Plato gave so much attention in his earlier and middle dialogues. 3.Next, we studied the Hellenistic philosophy of action and value and the Hellenistic philosophers' uses of evaluative adverbials. Eventually, we can say that the structure of the theory of action and value was drastically altered after Aristotle's death, which is not unconnected with the fact that the'common understanding' of adverbial usage was lost in this period ; and that we inherited, indirectly, the theory of action and value from the Hellenistic philosophy through the tradition of European humanism, which is problematic in many respects. We must reconsider now the Hellenistic tradition of understanding human action and value from a new standpoit we reach.