《社会实在的建构》章节试读

《社会实在的建构》的笔记-第三章 概括摘抄 - 第三章 概括摘抄

本章题为语言和社会实在(language and social reality)。
目标是解释和论证：语言是制度性实在的根本构成要素。 (Language is essentially constitutive of institutional reality.)
作者要论述的目标可分为强弱两种形式，他要论证的是强形式。
弱形式为：语言制度在逻辑上先于其他制度。所有其他制度都先要有语言作为必要前提，但语言并不需要以其他制度为必要前提。(The institution of language is logically prior to other institutions. All other institutions presuppose language, but language does not presuppose the others.)
强形式为：每一种制度都需要有该制度中相关事实的语言因素。(Each institution requires linguistic elements of the facts within that very institution.)
作者首先对自己的论断进行解释。他论断中所说的语言因素指的是符号性工具。他认为符号性工具是构建制度性事实的重要特征：
The feature of language essential for the constitution of institutional facts is the existence of symbolic devices, such as words, that by convention **mean or represent or symbolize** something beyond themselces.【60】而他所说的“符号性”指：
There are words, symbols, or other conventional devices that **mean** something or express something or represent or symbolize something beyond themselves,** in a way that is publicly understandable**.【61】作者接下来对依赖语言的事实(language-dependent facts)和不依赖语言的事实(language-independent facts)进行区分：
The principle is clear enough—a fact is language independent if that very fact requires no linguistic elements for its existence.【61】第二个是对依赖语言的思想和不依赖语言的思想的区分，其中作者对不依赖语言的思想所举的例子是动物对饥渴的有意识的感觉。在作者的理解中，动物的前语言的知觉和前语言的信念都属于思想：
Some thoughts are language dependent in the sense that an animal could not have that very thought, but some thoughts are language independent in the sense that an animal can have those thoughts without having words or any other linguistic devices.【61】 作者提出成为依赖语言的事实所要满足的两个条件：
First, mental repreentations, such as thoughts, must be partly constitutive of the fact; and second, the representations in question must be language dependent.【62】制度性事实首先满足第一个条件，因为制度性事实的存在依赖于人们对其的信念和心理态度。接下来作者只要论证制度性事实满足第二个条件就能完成本章目标。因此作者把现在的论证目标归结为：作为制度性事实构成因素的思想都是依赖于语言的。(The thoughts that are constitutive of institutional facts are language dependent.) 作者举了“今天是10月26日星期二”的例子来表明存在这样一类思想，语言在其中具有逻辑的必然性，如果没有语言对它们的表达，他们就无法存在：
The features in virtue of which today is Tuesday the 26th of October cannot exist independently of a verbal system, because its being Tuesday the 26th of October is a matter of its relation to a verbal system. If there were no verbal system, there would be no such fact, even though this day remains the day that it is regardless of what anybody thinks or says.【65】需要注意的是，虽然某年某月某日不同于物理上的一段时间，是需要依赖于某个特定时间计算系统的思想，但是这并不是制度性事实。因为此处没有新的地位性功能的产生。在第二章中作者谈到了二者的关系：
The key element in the move from the collective imposition of function to the creation of institutional facts is the imposition of a collectively recognized **status** to which a function is attached.【41】新地位性功能的产生遵循构成性规则：X在C中算作Y。其中：
The "counts as" locution names a feature of the imposition of a status to which a function is attached by way of collective intentionality, where the status and its accompanying function go beyond the sheer brute physical functions that can be assigned to physical objects.【44】因此上述例子不是制度性事实就是因为它没有赋予该时间段超出其自身物理功能的新功能，而像圣诞节这种被赋予了新的地位性功能的某一天就属于制度性事实。
作者认为，阻碍人们发现这样一类没有语言就无法存在的制度性事实的原因是，关于实物的表达方式使我们以为表达中的sense总是能对应一个表达外的referent。但对于制度性事实而言，情况却完全不同，因为我们必须要用符号手段才能实现“X在C中算作Y”的地位转换：
The very design of status-functions is such that they both are partly constituted by thoughts and that prelinguistic forms of thought are inadequate to do the job. The reason is that they exist only by way of collective agreement, and there can be no prelinguistic way of formulating the content of the agreement, because there is no prelinguistic natural phenomenon there.
...the agent must have some way to represent the new status. He cannot do it in terms of prelinguistic brute features of the X term. He can't get from thoughts just about the color and the shape of the dollar bill to the status "money" any more than he can get from thoughts just about movement of the man with the ball to the status "touchdown, six points."【69】作者认为在制度性事实和非制度性事实之间不存在严格的界线，到此作者基本完成了对本章论述目标的论证。之后作者提到了语言自身作为制度性事实如何可能的问题，作者认为由于儿童是在语言环境中成长的，因此language doesn't require language in order to be language because it already is language. 事实上作者只是解答了语言如何在已有语言的环境中维持的问题而并没有详细解答语言如何在没有语言的环境中被创生出来的问题。
关于人们所习惯接受的实物的表达方式和制度性实在的表达方式的区别，作者谈到：Symbols do not create cats and dogs and evening stars; they create only the possibility of referring to cats, dogs, and evening stars in a publicly accessible way. But symbolization creats the very ontological categories of money, property, points scored in games and political offices, as well as the categories of words, and speech act.【75】最后作者提到了语言在制度性事实中的其他四种功能，分别是：使制度性事实能从其承载物的物理性质中被辨识出来的功能、使制度性事实可被公共交流的功能、表征复杂的制度性事实的功能和维持制度性事实的延续的功能。