RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    대통합 언어이론을 향하여

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76379824

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This article does not deal with a theory or theories in the usual sense of the term but rather harks back to its etymological source, theorein ' to look at.' The phrase 'theory of language' thus purports a 'view of language' and does not carry the force of scientific explication of language. In fact, the word ' scientific' or 'science' per se originates from scire 'to know' and is here to be considered not so much in regard to some kind of positivistic methodology as a form of knowledge. If this exposition sounds unduly ingenious, that is because one is caught up in all kinds of presuppositions about the words under consideration. Sometimes, when we come to grips with an issue that strikes our mind as truly important, our language, by the light of which we hope to proceed safely, plays the will-o'-the-wisp instead and leaves us in the middle of a murky maze, twisting what was at first blush a mere cinch into a Gordian knot. On such occasions, etymology comes along the way and sends us back to itself as its own principle: Resort to etymos logos 'original, true word'! The main thrust of the present study is that alongside the quantitative, positivistic thought there is another equally valuable mode of qualitative and humanistic thinking that makes a whole gamut of new and concrete investigations possible, that an integrated theory of language is Possible by way of a happy amalgamation of diversified, humanistic views of language. With this idea as the leitmotif we explore two models of theory which typically set themselves up for a 'scientific' approach to language: analytic philosophy that delves into what it calls logical simples, and contemporary linguistics that stubbornly teeters around some formal rigor or other. It is argued that they are both characterized by a looking away from the fluid, ill-definable aspects of language, giving a preference to segments and isolated facts as a means to avoid those larger wholes and totalities which if they had to be seen would in the long run lead to an uncomfortable state of mind. Language, in the final analysis, is a Protean entity: so capricious and multifarious, and yet so noetic and prophetic, that we should catch sight of its picturesque images in their entirety to give form to an integrated theory of language.
    번역하기

    This article does not deal with a theory or theories in the usual sense of the term but rather harks back to its etymological source, theorein ' to look at.' The phrase 'theory of language' thus purports a 'view of language' and does not carry the for...

    This article does not deal with a theory or theories in the usual sense of the term but rather harks back to its etymological source, theorein ' to look at.' The phrase 'theory of language' thus purports a 'view of language' and does not carry the force of scientific explication of language. In fact, the word ' scientific' or 'science' per se originates from scire 'to know' and is here to be considered not so much in regard to some kind of positivistic methodology as a form of knowledge. If this exposition sounds unduly ingenious, that is because one is caught up in all kinds of presuppositions about the words under consideration. Sometimes, when we come to grips with an issue that strikes our mind as truly important, our language, by the light of which we hope to proceed safely, plays the will-o'-the-wisp instead and leaves us in the middle of a murky maze, twisting what was at first blush a mere cinch into a Gordian knot. On such occasions, etymology comes along the way and sends us back to itself as its own principle: Resort to etymos logos 'original, true word'! The main thrust of the present study is that alongside the quantitative, positivistic thought there is another equally valuable mode of qualitative and humanistic thinking that makes a whole gamut of new and concrete investigations possible, that an integrated theory of language is Possible by way of a happy amalgamation of diversified, humanistic views of language. With this idea as the leitmotif we explore two models of theory which typically set themselves up for a 'scientific' approach to language: analytic philosophy that delves into what it calls logical simples, and contemporary linguistics that stubbornly teeters around some formal rigor or other. It is argued that they are both characterized by a looking away from the fluid, ill-definable aspects of language, giving a preference to segments and isolated facts as a means to avoid those larger wholes and totalities which if they had to be seen would in the long run lead to an uncomfortable state of mind. Language, in the final analysis, is a Protean entity: so capricious and multifarious, and yet so noetic and prophetic, that we should catch sight of its picturesque images in their entirety to give form to an integrated theory of language.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • 분석철학의 경우
    • 현대언어학의 경우
    • 언어, 영원한 프로테우스
    • 대통합 언어이론
    • 인용문헌
    • 분석철학의 경우
    • 현대언어학의 경우
    • 언어, 영원한 프로테우스
    • 대통합 언어이론
    • 인용문헌
    • abstract
    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼