詞匯學(xué)語義三角形Triangleofreference

1、Trian gle of referenceFrom Wikipedia, the free en cyclopediaJump to: n avigati on, searchtalk page.This article has multiple issues . Please help improve it or discuss these issues on theThis article may need to be rewritten entirely to comply withWikipedia's quality standards, as article. You c

2、an help. The discussionpage may contain suggestio ns. (May 2009)This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. (February 2008)This article's tone or style may not re

3、flect the encyclopedic tone usedon Wikipedia . See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (February 2008)The triangle of referenee (also known as the triangle of meaning and the semantic triangle) is a model of how linguistic symbols are related to the objects they represe

4、 nt. The tria ngle was published in The Meaning of Meaning (1923) by Ogden and Richards . While sometimes known as the"Ogde n/Richards tria ngle" the idea dates back un til at least 1810, by BernardBolzano, in his Beitr?ge zu einer begru ndeteren Darstellung der Mathematik The relatio ns b

5、etwee n the tria ngular corners may be phrased more precisely in causal terms as follows:TRUE1. The matter evokesthe writer's thought.2. The writer refers the matter to the symbol.3. The symbol evokesthe reader's thought.4. The reader refers the symbol back to the matter.Con te ntshide«

6、 1 The com mun icative sta nd«2 Direction of fit«3 The Delta Factor«4 See also«5 Refere nces6 Exter nal li nksedit The com muni cative sta ndSuch a tria ngle represe nts ONE pers on, whereas com muni catio n takes place betwee n TWO (objects, not n ecessarily pers on s). So imagi

7、 ne ano ther tria ngle and con sider that for the two to un dersta nd each other, the content that the "tria ngles" represe nt must fit or be alig ned. Clearly, this calls for synchroni sati on and an in terface as well as scaledisambiguation needed among other things. Notice also, that we

8、 perceive the world mostly through our eyes and in alter native phases of see ing and not see ing with cha nge in the en vir onment as the most inm porta nt in formatio n to look for. Our eyes are len ses and we see asurface (2D) in ONE directi on (focus ing) if we are stati onary and the object is

9、not moving either. This is why you may position yourself in one corner of the triangle and by replicating (mirroring) it, you will be able to see the whole picture, your cognitive epistemological and the ontological existential or physical model of life, the uni verse, existe nee, etc. comb in ed.ed

10、it Direction of fitMain article: Direction of fitJohn Searle used the notion of "direction of fit" to create a taxonomy ofillocutionary acts .World or intended Writer'sReferent f ThoughtencodedThought J SymbolReader's extended or WordWord-to-World FitWriter's THOUGHT retrieves

11、SYMBOL suited to REFERENT,Word suited to World.World-to-Word FitReader's THOUGHT retrieves REFERENT suited to SYMBOL, World suited to Word.Actually the arrows in dicate that there is someth ing excha nged betwee n thetwo parties and it is a feedback cycle. Especially, if you imagine that the wor

12、ld is represe nted in both pers ons' mind and used for reality check. If you look at the triangle above again, then remember that reality check is not what is in dicated there betwee n the sig n and the refere nt and mareked as "true', because a term or a sig n is allocated "arbitr

13、arily'. What you check for is the observanee of the law of identity which requires you and your partner to sort out that you are talk ing about the same thing. So the chu nk of reality and the term are replacable/i ntercha ngeable within limits and your con cepts in the mind as prese nted in som

14、e appropriate way are all related and mean the same thing. Usually the check does not stop there, your ideas must also be tested for feasibility and doability to make sure that they are "real" and not "phantasy". Reality check comes from con solidat ing your experie nee with othe

15、r people's experienee to avoid solipsism and/or by putting your ideas (projection) in practice (producti on) and see the react ion. Notice, however how vague the verbs used and how the concept of a fit itself is left unexpla ined in details.edit The Delta FactorMain article: The Message in the B

16、ottle#"The Delta Factor"According to Walker Percy , the anthropological theories of the modern age "noIon ger work and the theories of the new age are not yet known". Percy therefore sees his task as coming up with a new theory of man, which he chooses to cen ter on Ian guage, ma

17、n's attribute that separates him from the ani mals. Percy regrets that no existi ng research really deals with the questi on of how Ian guage really works, of how huma n beings use and un dersta nd the symbols of linguistics. Percy puts this question into a sort of no-man's land, what he cal

18、ls a "terra in cog nita", betwee n lin guistics and psychology.The Delta Factor , first published in January 1975, is Percy's theory of language on the one hand and his theory of man in a nu tshell on the other, eve ntually to be expanded in The Message in the Bottle (1975).5 It adapts

19、 itself to the story of Helen Keller's learning to say and sign the word 'water' while Annie Sullivan poured water over her hands and repeatedly made the sig ns for water into her hand. A behaviorist read ing of this sce ne might draw a causal relati on ship such that in resp onse to Sul

20、liva n's stimuli in her hand Keller made a connection in her brain between the sign and the substanee. This is too simplistic a reading, insists Percy. Keller was receiving from both the sign for water and the water itself, which make up a tria ngle together with Keller such that each corner lea

21、ds to the other two corn ers. Percy argues that this lin guistic tria ngle is "absolutely irreducible" and serves as the build ing block for all of huma n in tellige nee. The mome nt whe n this Delta en tered the mi nd ofman, he became man.Furthermore, the corners of the tria ngle depart a

22、nd evolve from their behaviorist perspectives. Hele n Keller becomes someth ing other tha n just an orga nism in her en vir onment because she is coupli ng two un related things water the word and water the liquid together. Likewise, water the liquid is made something more than water in itself becau

23、se Keller has coupled it with the arbitrary sound 'water', and water the word becomes more than just the sound or sign for it. In this way, "the Delta phenomenon yielded a new world and maybe a new way of getting at it. It was not the world of organisms and environments but just as real

24、 and twice as human" -man is made whole by the Delta where the popular no ti ons of religi on and scie nee had split him in two.Looking at the story and example to illustrate thinking cognition , one may see and interpret the set in terms of semantic primitives that are the building blocks of t

25、hinking in the pre-la nguage period of in dividual and collective developme nt. In terms of semantic primitives, everything may be reduced to the concepts of object, relation and property that are the elements of an upper orfoundationontology . Here water (an object (a physical tangible object) is related (through the men tal operati on abstract ion represe nted by a verb) to the word water (another object, but as the result of the operation a property of the original object, now an object of abstracti on or con cept in the mi nd in