语言与人脑科学研究中的“伽利略谜题”

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本文首先回顾了语言与人脑科学学科产生的历史背景，而后聚焦于语言与人脑科学研究中的一个重要论题即“伽利略谜题”展开评述。主要观点是：1）“伽利略谜题”代表了乔姆斯基对人类语言本质一贯的理论思考，它与语言知识获得的“柏拉图问题”有着共同的理论关切，可以在17、18世纪以来的认知科学传统中找到源头，是语言学与心理学、神经科学、生物学等相关学科相互交叉和渗透的重要促动因素；2）由于语言外化的多样性，需要通过对包含隐性成分在内的“拼盘式”外化现象进行综合考察才能准确还原I?语言简约性的真实本质；3）语言与人脑科学学科对简约性的追求是爱因斯坦所说的科学理论建构中“神奇原则”的一个体现；4）运用强式制图策略对各种或显或隐的功能中心语进行考察有助于深化对“伽利略谜题”的理解。

关键词: 伽利略谜题, 语言与人脑科学, 神奇原则, 外化, 强式制图策略

Abstract:

This article first reviews the background behind the emergence of the discipline of Language and Human Brain Sciences. It then focuses on one of the essential topics within the study of language and brain: the Galilean Challenge. The main viewpoints are as follows: 1) The concept of the Galilean Challenge represents Chomsky’s consistent thoughts on the nature of language. It shares a common theoretical concern with Plato’s Problem of language acquisition, the study of which can trace back to the tradition since the 17th and 18th centuries. This has been one of the driving factors for the intersection and infiltration of linguistics, psychology, neuroscience, biology and other related disciplines; 2) Given the diversity in language externalization, a comprehensive examination of the so-called "patchwork" externalization, encompassing implicit components, is necessary to accurately capture the true essence of the simplicity of I-language; 3) The pursuit of simplicity in studying language and human brain sciences mirrors Einstein's "Miracle Creed" in formulating scientific theories; 4) Employing the strongest cartographic strategy in exploring various explicit or implicit functional heads can significantly enhance our understanding of the Galilean Challenge.

Key words: the Galilean Challenge, language and human brain sciences, Miracle Creed, externalization, the strongest cartographic strategy

中图分类号:

H0-06

司富珍. 语言与人脑科学研究中的“伽利略谜题”[J]. 外国语, 2024, 47(2): 2-9.

Fuzhen SI. “The Galilean Challenge” in the Study of Language and Human Brain Sciences[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2024, 47(2): 2-9.

图/表 1

图1

参考文献 0

	Beauregard, J. Theological Neuroethics: Christian ethics meets the science of the human brain The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 2018 18 4 758 760 Beauregard, J. Theological Neuroethics: Christian ethics meets the science of the human brain[J]. The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, 2018, 18(4): 758−760. doi: 10.5840/ncbq201818480
	Campbell, Robin N. On Innateness: Nec rasa est, nec omnia tenet[C]// Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 1988, 9. 1−12.
	Chomsky, N. Explanatory models in linguistics Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics 1966 44 528 550 Chomsky, N. Explanatory models in linguistics[J]. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 1966, 44: 528−550. doi: 10.1016/S0049-237X(09)70617-2
	Chomsky, N. Rules and Representations[M]. New York: Columbia University Press, 1980.
	Chomsky, N. New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
	Chomsky, N. Three factors in language design Linguistic Inquiry 2005 36 1 1 22 Chomsky, N. Three factors in language design[J]. Linguistic Inquiry, 2005, 36(1): 1−22. doi: 10.1162/0024389052993655
	Chomsky, N. The Galilean Challenge Inference 2017 3 1 1 7 Chomsky, N. The Galilean Challenge[J]. Inference, 2017, 3(1): 1−7.
	Chomsky,N. Understanding ourselves:On language and thought[R]. Beijing:BLCU Lecture. 2022. 亦可参见司富珍,时仲,赵欣宇的中译本“读懂我们自己:论语言和思想”,语言战略研究,2022,7(6):56−64.
	Cinque, G. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective[M]. Oxford University Press, 1999.
	Cinque, G. & L. Rizzi. The cartography of syntactic structures[C]. CISCL Working Papers on Language and Cognition, 2008, 2: 43−59.
	Deutsch, W. , Koster, C. & J. Koster. What can we learn from children’ s errors in understanding anaphora? Linguistics 1986 24 203 225 Deutsch, W. , Koster, C. & J. Koster. What can we learn from children’ s errors in understanding anaphora?[J]. Linguistics, 1986, 24: 203−225.
	Einstein, A. On the generalized theory of gravitation Scientific American 1950 182 4 13 17 Einstein, A. On the generalized theory of gravitation[J]. Scientific American, 1950, 182(4): 13−17. doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0450-13
	Foster-Gilbert, C. Neil Messer, Theological Neuroethics: Christian Ethics Meets the Science of the Human Brain Theology 2019 122 2 148 149 Foster-Gilbert, C. Neil Messer, Theological Neuroethics: Christian Ethics Meets the Science of the Human Brain[J]. Theology, 2019, 122(2): 148−149. doi: 10.1177/0040571X18817441v
	Galilei, G. Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo (Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World System)[M]. Florence: Gian Battista Landini, 1632.
	Hall, W. Towards a more truly human brain science The Lancet 2013 382 9895 850 850 Hall, W. Towards a more truly human brain science[J]. The Lancet, 2013, 382(9895): 850−850. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61851-6
	Miller, George A. The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2003 7 141 144 Miller, George A. The cognitive revolution: A historical perspective[J]. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003, 7: 141−144. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00029-9
	Philip, H. Simulating the human brain: Scientists have started various major projects to simulate and understand the brain, but many neuroscientists remain sceptical about their scope and aims EMBO Reports 2015 16 6 685 688 Philip, H. Simulating the human brain: Scientists have started various major projects to simulate and understand the brain, but many neuroscientists remain sceptical about their scope and aims[J]. EMBO Reports, 2015, 16(6): 685−688. doi: 10.15252/embr.201540571
	Putnam, H. The ‘Innateness Hypothesis’ and explanatory models in linguistics[J]. Synthese, 1967, 17: 12−22.
	Rizzi, L. The fine structure of left periphery[C]//Haegeman, L. Elements of Grammar: Handbook of Generative Symtax. Klumer Academic Publishers, 1997. 281−337.
	Si, Fuzhen. Paralinguistic features and non-verbal elements in human communication[R]. The 7th international conference on formal linguistics, 2016.
	Si, Fuzhen. Beyond Left Periphery. The 2nd international workshop on syntactic cartography[R]. 2017.
	Si, Fuzhen. Silent negations: A proposal on the study towards Galilean Challenge[R]. The joint conference “The 4th international workshop on syntactic cartography” and “The first international forum on language and brain”. Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University, 2021.
	Tomalin,M. Linguistics and the Formal Sciences[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2006.(亦可参见司富珍,刘文英译. 语言学与形式科学 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆,2018.
	陈树民, 袁浩. 语文教学现代化与人脑科学（上）——谈语文教学目标的现代化江苏教育 1997 6 29 31 陈树民,袁浩. 语文教学现代化与人脑科学(上)−谈语文教学目标的现代化[J]. 江苏教育,1997,(6): 29−31.
	程琪龙. 语言研究的超学科意识外国语 2020 2 52 60 程琪龙. 语言研究的超学科意识[J]. 外国语,2020,(2): 52−60.
	刘昌, 翁旭初. 人脑功能苏小小共振成像及其在认知神经科学研究中的应用生理科学进展 1999 30 1 84 90 刘昌,翁旭初. 人脑功能苏小小共振成像及其在认知神经科学研究中的应用[J]. 生理科学进展,1999,30(1): 84−90. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0559-7765.1999.01.019
	骆明琼. 乔姆斯基教授访谈实录外国语 2017 4 109 112 骆明琼. 乔姆斯基教授访谈实录[J]. 外国语,2017,(4): 109−112. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2017.04.013
	束定芳, 张逸岗. 人脑科学的最新发现及其对语言学和外语教学研究的启发外语界 1994 4 60 63 束定芳,张逸岗. 人脑科学的最新发现及其对语言学和外语教学研究的启发[J]. 外语界,1994,(4): 60−63.
	司富珍. 句法制图研究的新视野语言教学与研究 2019 3 25 37 司富珍. 句法制图研究的新视野[J]. 语言教学与研究,2019,(3): 25−37. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0257-9448.2019.03.004
	司富珍. 句法制图理论研究[M]. 北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2023.
	司富珍, 李富强, 康兴. 乔姆斯基语言学术思想在中国——简约性“神奇原则”的科学魅力语言战略研究 2022 6 77 84 司富珍,李富强,康兴. 乔姆斯基语言学术思想在中国−简约性“神奇原则”的科学魅力[J]. 语言战略研究,2022,(6): 77−84.
	孙玉. 《我们是何种生物?》评介外国语 2017 4 104 108 孙玉. 《我们是何种生物?》评介[J]. 外国语,2017,(4): 104−108. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2017.04.012
	王立平. 也谈谈“中国脑计划” 中国科学: 生命科学 2016 2 208 209 王立平. 也谈谈“中国脑计划”[J]. 中国科学:生命科学,2016,(2): 208−209.
	王云. 脑科学成大国“必争之地” 中国经济报告 2016 6 111 113 王云. 脑科学成大国“必争之地”[J]. 中国经济报告,2016,(6): 111−113.
	王强. 经典生物语言的三大原则及其与现当代生物语言学的关联外国语 2016 3 55 63 王强. 经典生物语言的三大原则及其与现当代生物语言学的关联[J]. 外国语,2016,(3): 55−63.
	杨雄里. 为中国脑计划呐喊中国科学: 生命科学 2016 2 201 202 杨雄里. 为中国脑计划呐喊[J]. 中国科学:生命科学,2016,(2): 201−202.
	杨阳露, 袁增强. 话脑计划中国科学: 生命科学 2016 2 210 211 杨阳露,袁增强. 话脑计划[J]. 中国科学:生命科学,2016,(2): 210−211.
	徐烈炯. 生成语法学方法论外语教学与研究 1984 1 14 22 徐烈炯. 生成语法学方法论[J]. 外语教学与研究,1984,(1): 14−22.
	徐烈炯. 生成语法理论[M]. 上海:上海教育出版社,1988.
	朱海婷, 林允清. 计算语言学框架下的语言习得研究——《语言天赋论与刺激贫乏论》评介外国语 2016 1 109 112 朱海婷,林允清. 计算语言学框架下的语言习得研究−《语言天赋论与刺激贫乏论》评介[J]. 外国语,2016,(1): 109−112.
	周频. 认知神经语言学方法论模型的建构外国语 2016 2 39 47 周频. 认知神经语言学方法论模型的建构[J]. 外国语,2016,(2): 39−47.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

[1]	成汹涌. 语言原型-模型视域下英汉移就辞格标记建构对比探蹊[J]. 外国语, 2023, 46(1): 11-22.
[2]	张萍, 王晓琳. 多义短语动词句子加工中的语义因素和意象图式[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(2): 27-36.
[3]	庞加光, 张韧. 基线/阐释模型下的汉语离合词现象研究[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(2): 72-83.
[4]	李贞亮, 潘海华. 双“每”句中的受约变量及其优势解读[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(2): 47-60.
[5]	马宝鹏, 庄会彬. 二十年来韵律-句法接口研究的回顾与启示[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(1): 56-66.
[6]	刘云飞, 屈琼, 陈琪, 李悦华. 准定语句式:认知参照点关系和转喻的视角[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(2): 31-40.
[7]	刘芬, 石毓智. 语法系统对构式选择的制约——英汉比较结构差异的原因[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(2): 2-8.
[8]	钟书能, 王雪乔. 汉语列锦诗句认知建构机制研究[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(2): 72-80.
[9]	刘正光, 邓忠, 邓若瑜. 认知对等及其认识论意义[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(1): 34-47.
[10]	何伟, 马子杰. 生态语言学视角下的评价系统[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(1): 48-58.
[11]	王文斌, 张媛. 认知语言学在中国:传承与创新——“第11届中国认知语言学研讨会”纪实[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(1): 122-124.
[12]	赵蓉晖, 冯健高. 新时代社会语言学的发展趋势与前沿问题——“首届社会语言学高端国际论坛”综述[J]. 外国语, 2020, 43(1): 125-126.
[13]	刘向东. 系统功能语言学视角下语言的综合征性质[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(5): 53-61.
[14]	李霄翔, 封叶, 季月. 中国英语学习者英语隐喻加工与概念整合——来自ERP的证据[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(1): 50-60.
[15]	于秀金. 跨语言(非)现实与时—体—情态的范畴关联及显赫性格局[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(3): 9-22.