-
一、语义学视角下语义的表现
（一）王寅教授的分析
(1)
说话人意义（
speaker?s
meaning
）
,
受话人的意义（
hearer?s meaning
）
[
语言交际过程中参与者的角
< br>色分析
]
(2)
自然意义（
natural
meaning
）和非自然意义（
unnatural
meaning
）
(3)
词素义
（
morpheme
meaning
）
,
词义
（
word
meaning
）
,
句义
（
sentence
meaning
）
,
话词义
（
utterance
meaning
）
,
语篇义（
discourse
meaning
）
(4)
内涵义（
intensional
meaning
）与
外延义（
extentional meaning
）
[
从哲学和逻辑学角度
]
(5)
概念意义和附加意义（
co
nceptual meaning and added
meaning
）
（二）
、
Leech
对意义的区分七种
Leech
recognizes seven types of meaning in his
Semantics
1)
Conceptual meaning :logical, cognitive,
or denotative content
2)
Connotative meaning: What is
communicated by virtue of what language refers to
3)
Social
meaning: What is communicated of the social
circumstances of language use
4)
Affective
meaning: What is communicated of the feelings and
attitudes of the speaker/writer
5)
Reflected
meaning : What is communicated through association
with another sense of the same expression
6)
Collocative
meaning: What is communicated through association
with words which tend to occur in the environment
of
another word
7)
Thematic
meaning:
What
is
communicated
by
the
way
in
which
the
message
is
organized
in
terms
of
order
and
emphasis.
以下为对上述的解释
1
、自然意义，非自然意义
Natural meaning and
non-natural meaning
Natural meaning and
nonnatural meaning is put forward by Grice in his
famous article “Meaning”.
As
for
natural
meaning,
there
is
the
evidential
relationship
between
a
cause
and
its
effect.
An
example
of
natural
meaning is “Those
spots mean measles.” “x means y” is related to “x
shows that y,” “x is a symptom of y” and “x
lawfully
correlates with
y
”. Those
spots
on little Jimmy
do not
really
mean
measles in natural
meaning,
if Jimmy does
not have
measles, even if the spots typically
correlate with measles.
Nonnatural
meaning pertains to language and communication. It
means words and speakers. On nonnatural
s
ense, “
x
means
y
” is closer to
“
x
says/asserts that
y
”, “
x
expresses
y
”. And
when “
x
means
y
” is the case, it will
usually be true that
someone, or some
group, means something by
x
.
In nonnatural sense, it can be true that
“
x
means
y
” even though
x
obtains
when
y
is not the case. Thus our speaker might
indeed have meant that you should bring more
whisky, when in reality you
should not:
his meaning it, in nonnatural sense, does not make
it so.
In Grice?s opinion, nonnatural
meaning is used to induce some bel
ief
in hearer. More than that, it is used to induce
the
belief by getting the addressee to
recognize the intention to induce a belief: in
meaning something, then speaker does not
merely cause the hearer to have a
belief, he/she overtly gives the speaker a reason
to believe, the reason being that he/she
wants the speaker to believe. Thus what
a person means, in the nonnatural sense, comes
down to his/her complex mental
states,
especially intentions.
2
、关于听话人，说话人
The
Speaker and the Listener
To ensure
smooth communication between the speaker and the
listener, it is important to nail down the role of
them
and
the
interaction
between
them.
Some
basic
linguistics
theory,
such
as
Speech
Act Theory,
the
Cooperative
Principle,
Conversational Implicatures,
the Politeness Principle, atc. will help learners
to well understand the role of the speaker and
1
the listener.
Speech act is actions performed via
utterances. In English, it is commonly given more
specific labels, such as apology,
complaint, compliment, invitation,
promise, or request. These descriptive terms for
different kinds of speech acts apply to
the
speaker's
communicative
intention
in
producing
an
utterance.
The
speaker
normally
expects
that
his
or
her
communicative intention will be
recognized by the hearer. Both speaker and hearer
are usually helped in this process by the
circumstances surrounding the
utterance.
We know that quite often a
speaker can mean a lot more than what is said. The
problem is to explain how the speaker
can manage to convey more than what is
said and how the hearer can arrive at the
speaker?s meaning. H. P. Grice believes
that there must be some
mechanisms governing the production and
comprehension of these utterances. He suggests
that
there is a set of
assumptions guiding the conduct of conversation.
This is what he calls the Cooperative Principle
(CP).
According to Grice,
conversational implicatures can arise from either
strictly and directly observing or deliberately
and
openly flouting the maxims, that
is, speakers can produce implicatures in two ways:
observance and non-observance of the
maxims.
The
least
interesting
case
is
when
speakers
directly
observe
the
maxims
so
as
to
generate
conversational
implicatures.
If
the
hearer
wants
to
accurately
export
the
conversational
implicatures,
he
or
she
should
know something
about the the following aspects:
1
）
conventionality
implicatures of the utterance;
2
）
cooperative principle and
criteria; 3
）
the context of
the utterance; 4
）
some common
background knowledge of the speaker and the
listener.
In
most
cases,
the
indirectness
is
motivated
by
considerations
of
politeness. Politeness
is
usually
regarded
by
most
pragmatists as a means or strategy
which is used by a speaker to achieve various
purposes, such as saving face, establishing
and maintaining harmonious social
relations in conversation, thus to promote better
communication between the speaker
and
the listener.
3
、句义，词义，话语意义，命
题意义，篇章意义
从哲学方面以及语言学方面对其进行分析；
它们在不同语境中状态；结合法律举例
1) Word
meaning
Word is
a unit of expression that has universal intuitive
recognition by native speakers, whether it is
expressed in spoken
or written form.
Sense and reference are two terms often
encountered in the study of word meaning. They are
two related but different
aspects
of
meaning.
Sense
is
concerned
with
the
inherent
meaning
of
the
linguistic
form.
It
is
the
collection
of
all
the
features of the
linguistic form: it is abstract and de-
contextualized. Reference means what a linguistic
form refers to in the
real physical
world; it deals with the relationship between the
linguistic element and the non-linguistic world of
experience.
Obviously, linguistic forms
having the same sense may have different
references in different situations. On the other
hand,
there are also occasions, when
linguistic forms with the same reference might
differ in sense. A very good example is the
two expressions “morning star” and
“evening star”. These two differ
in
sense but as a matter of fact, what they refer to
is
the same: the very same star that we
see in the sky.
According
to Wittegenstein, words like tools, the meaning of
word depends on the usage of the word. In another
word, the
meaning
of
word
depends
on
the
function
of
the
word.
The
meaning
of
a
word
rests
with
the
usage
of
the
word
in
a
language. Words are
different tools in language. These tools are
characterized by their usage. Sometimes, he did
not see
words as tools, however, he
said directly: languages are tools. The different
concepts in language are different tools.
2) Sentence Meaning:
(
句子意义是构成句子的词汇意义和
结构意义共同作用的结果
)
The meaning of
a sentence is often studied as the abstract,
intrinsic property of the sentence itself in terms
of predication. It
is obvious that the
sentence meaning is connected with the meaning of
the words which constitute the sentence; but it is
still
clear that the sentence meaning
is not the totality of the meanings of the
component words because the syntactical structure
of the sentence also plays a role in
determining the sentence meaning. That is to say,
the meaning of a sentence is a product
of both lexical and grammatical
meaning. Lexical meaning is the de-contextual
denotation of the words which is defined in
the dictionary, while the grammatical
meaning is abstract meaning represented by the
grammatical structures of the words.
Semantic relations:
2
(
句子之间的关系：同义，反义，
蕴含
)
Synonymy: the sameness
in meaning between sentences.
Antonymy:
the oppositeness in meaning between sentences.
eg: “Overruled.”
“
反对无效。
”
“Sustained.”
“
反对有效。
”
（
uttered by a
judge when confronting an objection of a lawyer in
the court)
Entailment
：
A
sentence entails a second sentence when the truth
of the first sentence guarantees the truth of the
second
sentence, and the falsity of the
second sentence guarantees the falsity of the
first.
Linguistic Analysis:
(
句子除了有字面意义外，还有在一定语境中产生的语境意义和会话含义
)
Besides the combination of the
lexical and grammatical meaning of the sentence,
which may be called the literal meaning
of sentence, there are another two
kinds of sentence meaning: the contextual meaning
and conversational implicature of
sentences. The contextual meaning
refers to the meaning attached to the intrinsic
meaning of the sentence when used by
people, and connected with the text,
situation, cultural background, etc. The
conversational implicature refers to the implied
meaning of the speaker when using the
sentence.
Philosophical
Analysis:
Broadly speaking,
the meaning of a sentence is a proposition. In
truth-conditional semantics, the meaning of a
sentence is
obtained from and
determined by the conditions under which it may be
true. The linguistic philosopher G
.
Frege holds that a
sentence has no
truth value if the sentence has no clear meaning
because vague meaning may result in a failure in
judging
the truth value. Many sentences
have no truth value at all, but they still have
meaning. The meaning of such sentences is
largely determined by their conditions
of use rather than their truth conditions. Any
question, e.g., ?Which evidence will
prevail??
（哪样证据会被采信？）
lacks a direct
connection to a set of truth conditions.
Even though the sentences ?The
accused
is
acquittal.
?
and
?The
accused
is
found
innocent.
?
have
the
same
truth
conditions,
they
have
very
different
situations of use.
3) Proposition and proposition meaning
(1)
Proposition
:
usually defined as the content or meaning
expressed by a sentence; the relationship between
a sentence
and a proposition can be
seen as the expression and the expressed.
Generally, the sentences are declarative sentences
that
make
some
kind
of
judgments
that
is
beyond
the
capability
of
questions,
imperatives
or
excalmatives.
Additionally,
a
sentence that conveys no meanings can
never be called a proposition.
(2)
Proposition meaning:
the
truth value of a proposition.
In
semantics,
the
value
of
a
proposition
is
typically
studied
in
the
field
of
truth-conditional
semantics.
In
truth-conditional semantics, the
recognized way to figure out the meaning of a
sentence (or a proposition) is to find out the
conditions under whi
ch it
may be true. The famous example incited by the
famous linguist Tarski is: “?Snow is white? is
true iff snow is white” in which “iff”
stands for “if and only if”. And he summarized the
regularity for such propositions to
be true as “S is true iff
p
” a
nd
p
stands for the set of
conditions that fit for all sentences.
(3)
Linguistically
,
a
proposition
is
a
sentence
that
is
endowed
with
the
truth
value.
Sometimes,
a
proposition
can
be
expressed by different
sentences. For example:
a)
The interpretation of these Regulations shall be
vested in the Ministry of Finance.
b)
These Regulations shall be interpreted by the
Ministry of Finance.
These
two
sentences
both
speculate
the
proposition
that
“the
Regulations
will
be
interpreted
by
the
Ministry
of
Financ
e” though clearly they
are two distinct sentences.
And sometimes, the same sentence can
express different propositions when referred to in
different times, or by different
speakers. For instance:
c)
乙方为甲方培养四个实验室的工作人员。
In this statement, we can say that
“Pa
rty B will train four workers for
the library of Party A(
乙方为甲方的实验室培
养四个工作人员
)” or that “Party B will
train workers for the four libraries of Party A
（乙方为甲方的四个实验室培养工
作人员）
”
.
3
(4)
Philosophically
, the truth value of
proposition is usually described or analyzed
through syllogism. For instance:
d) All
men are mortal. Socrates is a man. So Socrates is
mortal.
In
philosophy,
there
are
generally
five
logical
connectives
to
connect
the
different
propositions
in
a
certain
context:
conjunction
(
and
, written as
&/
∧
), disjunction
(
or
, written
as
∨
), implication
(
if…then
,
written as →), equivalence (
if and
only
if
,
written
as
←→)
and
negation
(
not
,
written
as
～
).
In
the
field
of
linguistic
philosophy,
the
truth
value
of
a
proposition can vary
according to different interpretations.
4) Utterance and utterance
meaning
(1)
Utterance
: In
my point of view, the langue and parole shall be
mentioned before the utterance is discussed.
Generally
speaking, utterance does not
have a precise linguistic definition. Phonetically
an utterance is a unit of speech bounded by
silence. In dialogue, each turn by a
speaker may be considered an utterance. To some
degree, the “utterance” does not mean
words, sentences, or even the texts.
Sometimes, even an intonation or a gestures will
have their implied meanings.
(2)
Utterance meaning:
In semantics,
we know even the word “mean
more than
one meaning except its literal meaning. So in
accordance with this phenomenon, the
subjec
t “pragmatics” has
been formed. By virtue of the efforts
of some linguistic experts such as Austin and
Grice, they put forward some relevant
theories,
principles
and
methods
to
study
this
phenomenon,
therefore
the
most
outstanding
theory
(a
theory
of
the
illocutionary act) came
into being. The speaker may utter out one
utterance but refer to a total different thing
beyond its
literal meaning.
(3)
Some examples:
In legal English, some expressions are
quite different from daily language. Taking the
word “lawyer” for example, the
common
people may deems it as someone whose job is to
advise people about laws, write formal agreements,
or represent
people in court, but its
meaning is quite larger than that, it also refers
to those who study law or is closely related to
the
study of law, and so on. Now, let?s
look at one more example; the word “insured”, we
can find its pronunciation in the
dictionary, the letter
In legal English, there are also many
other examples; to make a simply speaking, the
utterance meaning is the meaning
beyond
it
literal
meaning.
To
know
the
deeper
meaning
or
the
implied
meaning,
relevant
situations
such
as
the
history,
culture and the
legal systems shall be taken into consideration.
5) Discourse and discourse
meaning
The meaning of discourse is the
psychological reflection of fraction of reality
formed by the interaction of the discourse and
personal background in personal
consciousness. There are three levels for the
meaning of discourse. The first refers to the
psychological
reflection
of
fraction
of
reality
in
the
sender?s
consciousness
in
the
process
from
reflection
transfer
to
discourse. The second refers to the
constructed meaning of discourse. And the third
refers to the psychological reflection of
fraction of reality formed by the
interaction of discourse and the receiver?s
background in the receiver?s consciousness.
The
meaning of discourse can
be considered as the language message contained in
the language sign and the message reflecting
the reality directly.
The meaning of discourse is the
psychological reflection of fraction of reality
formed by the interaction of the discourse and
personal background in personal
consciousness. There are three levels for the
meaning of discourse. The first refers to the
psychological
reflection
of
fraction
of
reality
in
the
sender?s
consciousness
in
the
process
from
reflection
transfer
to
discourse. The second refers to the
constructed meaning of discourse. And the third
refers to the psychological reflection of
fraction of reality formed by the
interaction of discourse and the receiver?s
background in the receiver?s consciousness.
The
meaning of discourse can
be considered as the language message contained in
the language sign and the message reflecting
the reality directly.
二、语义三角
Semantic Triangle
A
t
h
e
o
r
y
w
h
i
c
h
e
< br>x
p
l
i
c
i
t
i
l
y
e
m
p
l
o
y
s
t
h
e
n
o
t
i
o
n
“
c
o
n
c
< br>e
p
t
”
i
s
t
h
e
s
e
m
a
n
t
i
c
t
r
i
< br>a
n
g
l
e
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
b
y
O
g
d
e
n
a
n
d
R
i
c
h
a
r
d
i
n
t
h
e
i
r
T
h
e
M
e
a
n
i
n
g
o
f
M
e
a
n
i
n
g
.
T
h
e
y
< br>
a
r
g
u
e
t
h
a
t
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
b
e
t
< br>w
e
e
n
a
w
o
r
d
a
n
d
a
t
h
i
n
g
i
t
r
e
f
e
r
s
t
o
i
s
n
o
t
d
i
r
e
c
t
.
I
t
i
s
m
e
d
i
a
t
e
d
b
y
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
.
I
n
a
d
i
a
g
r
a
m
f
o
r
m
,
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
i
s
< br>r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
a
s
f
o
l
l
o
w
s
:
4
Concept
(Thought)
（
Symbolizes
）
(Refers to)
Symbol ------------------
Referent
(Word)
(Stands
for)
(Thing)
T
h
i
s
d
i
a
g
r
a
m
< br>i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
:
1)
Concept(
概念
)/Thought
(
思想
)
is
directly
linked
to
Referent(
所指物
)/Thing(
事物
).
The
Concept
is
based
on
the
objective things. In
other words, it is the reflective image of the
objective things in one?s mind. In this triangle,
there i
s a
real line between
the Concept and Referent, which
shows
“A Concept refers to a Thing”.
2
)
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
i
s
a
l
s
o
d
i
r
e
c
t
l
y
< br>
l
i
n
k
e
d
t
o
S
y
m
b
o
l
(
表
意
符
号
)
/
< br>W
o
r
d
(
词
)
.
T
h
e
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
i
s
r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
b
y
v
i
r
t
u
e
o
f
S
y
m
b
o
l
/
W
o
r
d
.
I
n
o
t
h
e
r
w
o
r
d
s
,
t
h
e
W
o
r
d
i
s
u
s
e
d
< br>
t
o
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
t
h
e
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
.
A
l
s
< br>o
a
r
e
a
l
l
i
n
e
l
i
n
k
t
h
e
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
a
n
d
S
y
m
b
o
l
/
W
o
r
d
,
< br>
w
h
i
c
h
s
h
o
w
s
“
A
W
o
r
d
s
y
m
b
o
l
i
z
< br>e
d
a
c
o
n
c
e
p
t
”
.
3
)
B
e
t
w
e
e
n
S
y
m
b
o
< br>l
/
W
o
r
d
a
n
d
Referent/Thing there is no direct and
necessary link. That is to say the link is
arbitrary and
conventional. A broken
line is used to connect the both, which shows “A
Word stands for a Referent/Thing”.
B
e
c
a
u
s
e
o
f
t
h
e
a
r
b
i
t
r
a
r
y
c
o
< br>n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
t
h
e
W
o
r
d
a
n
d
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
t
,
a
< br>T
h
i
n
g
c
a
n
b
e
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
b
y
< br>d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
W
o
r
d
s
.
F
o
r
e
x
a
m
p
l
e
:
d
o
g
i
s
狗
i
n
c
h
i
n
e
s
e
,
d
o
g
i
n
e
n
g
l
i
s
h
,
h
u
n
d
< br>
i
n
g
e
r
m
e
n
a
n
d
p
e
r
r
o
i
n
S
p
a
n
i
s
h
,
e
t
c
.
< br>
C
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
< br>
i
s
t
h
e
m
e
d
i
a
t
o
l
i
n
k
t
h
e
W
o
r
d
a
n
d
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
t
.
T
h
e
s
o
-
c
a
l
l
e
d
M
e
< br>a
n
i
n
g
i
s
t
h
e
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
< br>
b
e
t
w
e
e
n
W
o
r
d
a
n
d
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
t
.
B
e
< br>f
o
r
e
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
i
n
g
a
f
o
r
e
s
a
< br>i
d
r
e
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
h
i
p
,
t
h
e
r
e
m
u
< br>s
t
b
e
a
C
o
n
c
e
p
t
w
h
i
c
h
i
s
c
o
n
v
e
n
t
i
o
n
a
l
a
n
d
u
n
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
a
b
< br>l
e
i
n
t
h
e
m
i
n
d
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
a
n
d
h
e
a
r
e
r
.
B
a
s
e
< br>d
o
n
t
h
i
s
,
t
h
e
h
e
a
r
e
r
c
a
n
s
e
e
w
h
a
t
t
h
e
s
p
e
a
k
e
r
m
e
a
n
< br>s
.
三、涵义与指称
(On Sense and
Reference)
Outline of On Sense and
Reference
Ⅰ
The regular
connexion between a sign, its sense, and its
reference
(
Ⅰ
)A
proper name (word, sign, sign combination,
expression) expresses its sense, stands for or
designates its reference. By
means of a
sign we express its sense and designate its
reference.
(
Ⅱ
)Usually, a
sign corresponds a definite sense and a sense in
turn corresponds a definite reference, while a
given reference
(an object) does not
belong only a single sign. The same sense has
different expressions in different languages or
even in
the same language. But
exceptions to this regular behavior often occur
because natural languages do not always satisfy
this
condition. e. g The words ?the
celestial body most distant from the Earth? have a
sense, but it is very doubtful if they
also
have a reference. The
expression ?the least rapidly convergent series?
has a sense but demonstrably has no reference,
since
for every given convergent
series, another convergent, but less rapidly
convergent, series can be found.
(
Ⅲ
) The reference
and sense of a sign are to be distinguished from
the associated idea. The reference of a proper
name is the
object itself which we
designate by its means; the idea, which we have in
that case, is wholly subjective; in between lies
the
sense, which is indeed no longer
subjective like the idea, but is yet not the
object itself.
Ⅱ
The
relationship between a reference, its truth value,
and a thought (take subordinate clause as an
example)
(
Ⅰ
)The
subordinate clause usually has for its sense not a
thought, but only a part of one, and consequently
no truth value as
reference. It may
happen, however, that the sense of the subsidiary
clause is a complete thought, in which case it can
be
replaced
by
another
of
the
same
truth
value
without
harm
to
the
truth
of
the
whole-provided
there
are
no
grammatical
obstacles.
(
Ⅱ
) A subordinate
clause may not always be replaced by another of
equal truth value without harm to the truth of the
whole
sentence structure. The reasons
are as follows:
(1)
When the subordinate clause does not
stand for a truth value, inasmuch as it expresses
only a part of a thought;
(2)
When the
subordinate clause does stand for a truth value
but is not restricted to so doing, insomuch as its
sense includes
one thought and part of
another.
5
Ⅲ
Make
a conclusion of this paper with a formula
a = a and a = b are statements of
differing cognitive value. If now a = b, then
indeed the reference of ?b? is the same as
th
at
of ?a?, and hence the
truth value of ?a = b? is the same as that of ?a =
a?. In
spite of this, the
sense of ?b? may differ from that
of
?a?, and thereby the thought expressed in ?a = b?
differs from that of ?a = a?.
四、语义明晰化与语义模糊性
1
）
语义模糊的概念
模糊语
义学是近年来兴起的一门新学科，它建立在多值逻辑学之上，讨论自然语言的语义模糊性，主要研究具
有模糊性质的词句的意义。美国实用主义和符号学的创始人、著名哲学家皮尔斯认为
：
“
当事物出现几种可能状
态
时，
尽管说话者对这些状态进行了仔细的思考，
实际上仍不能确定是把这些状态排除出某个命题还是归属于这个命
题，这时候
，这个命题就是模糊的。上面说的实际上不能确定，我们指的并不是由于解释者的无知而不能确定，而
是因为说话者的语言特点就是模糊的。
”
（
Ballmer & Pinkal,
1983:2
）
语言的模糊性是普遍存在的。早在
1
957
年英国著名的语言学家琼斯
()
就开始察觉到语言的模糊性质。
他说
“:
我们大家
(
包括那些追求精确无误的人
),
在说话和写作时常常使用不精确的
,
含糊的
,
难以下定义的术语和原则。
这并不妨碍我们所用的词是非常有用的
,……
通常人们尽管使
用不精确的表达和难于下定义的术语
,
但仍能相互理
解。
”1965
年
,
美国电机工程和计算机科学家扎德教授
()
在美国《信息与控制》
(Information
and <
/p>
Control)
杂
志发表了题为《模糊
集》
(Fuzzy Sets)
的文章
,
提出了模糊理论。他指出
:
现实的物
体类别之间经常没有确定的界限
,
这
种
被称为
“
模糊集
”
的现象
,
表明了人类的认识能力具有一种模糊的特性。它们
的存在
,
对人们的抽象思维和信息传递
都有至关重要的作用。语言学界在扎德模糊理论的启发下认识到
:
模糊属性同样地不可分离地存在于人类的自然语
言之中。
我国学者伍铁平（
1999
）
，张乔（
1998
）
，秦秀白（
1984
）
，何自然（
1988
）等也
从不同的角度对语言、语义、
语用模糊作出了各自的理解和论述，
他们的研究都对我国模糊语义理论作出了重要的贡献。
这些论述从不同侧面揭
示出了模糊性的特征和实质，加深了我们对语义模糊性的认识。
所谓语义
的模糊性（
fuzziness
）
,
是指语义所表现
出来的一种语义不确定、
界限不分明、
亦此亦彼的性质，
归根到底就是人们认识中关于
对象类属边界和性态的不确
定性在语言中的反映
,
它是作为思维物质外壳的语言的特征。
German linguist Anton Marty gave a
profound understanding of the vagueness (
< br>注：此处用的是
vagueness
，但从其
定义来看，应该指的是
fuzziness) of language
by saying, “vagueness is such a kind of
phenomenon, that is, the field of
application of cer
tain names
is not strictly outlined”.
2
）
语义模糊现象的成因
客观原因：
客观世界中的许多事物、
现象、
特征等组成了一个连续体，
这就
很难在它们之间划一个确切的界限。
世界具有移动性、不可分性和连续体性。这种客观世
界的不可分性和连续体性，导致了范畴边界的模糊性，表示这
些范畴的词语具有模糊性也
就在所难免。大千世界错综复杂、变化多端，客观外界充满了复杂性、模糊性，这就决
定
了思维和认识的复杂性和模糊性，从而形成了语言的模糊性。例如，世界上五彩缤纷的颜色就构成一个连续统，<
/p>
不同色彩的本质差异体现为光波波长的差异，而光波波长的长短差异是连续的、渐变的。当
人们用语言来表达这些
难以切分的、连续的事物时，就会出现符号的所指边界不明的情况
。既然自然界的颜色是一种模糊现象，语言中标
志各种颜色的词也只能是模糊词。
主观原因：
从辩证唯物论的观点看，
模糊性根植于事物的普遍联系和发展变化这一根本属性，根植于差异的中
间过渡性，本质
上是客观的。但是，客体的模糊性只是语义模糊性产生的条件，如果没有人的认识活动，语义的模
糊性也不会产生。
模糊认识是人类不确定认识的基本形式和本质特征，
关于人类认识过程中形成的语义模糊一般有
以下几个原因：
首先，由于人的认识
能力的局限性，使人类在把握对象的类属和性态时缺乏明晰的界限或精确的划分，由此而
产生语义模糊性。客观事物本身是无限的，而人们的主观认识能力是有限的。人类对客观世界及自身的认识尽管从
整个发展历史来看是日趋深入的，
但在不同的发展阶段却存在着
一定的局限性，
这种认识上的局限性必然带来某种
语义模糊性。
其次，
人类在认知世界和进行范畴划分时，还必须遵循
“
经济原则
”
。
“
认知经济原
则
”
和
“
语言
经济原则
”
都是我
们社会生活中必不可
少的最基本准则。对于人类来说，在不影响思维的前提下，一个概念所能覆盖和储存的信息越
多越好，所需要的概念越少越好，这就符合认知经济原则。这种认知经济原则就决定了语言表达的经济性原则 。因
6
此，认知经济原则和语言经济原则就必然导致范畴语义
的模糊性和词语语义的模糊性。
另外，人类的隐喻认知系统，使得人类在认识事物时，会将客观事物的界限变得模糊起来
。
语言原因：
客观外界具有连续体性
质，人类思维和表达思维的语言必然会具有模糊性现象。从语言系统的角度
看，语言的意
义反映人们对客观事物的认识，客观事物的无穷与语言形式的有限这一矛盾，要求语言使用者要考虑
经济性原则，即以最少量的符号传递最大限度的信息，也就需要语言具有高度概括性和模糊性。从语言
的功能看，
人们之间言语交际的需要也是语义模糊性产生的原因。社会交际是语言的本质
功能，交际需要语言表达的模糊性。
由语境引起的模糊性在日常语言中并不少见，一些本
身不模糊的词语，在具体语境中能获得模糊的意义。人类在给
事物命名时由于认识上的局
限，往往会抓住事物的某一特征，而忽略或未能弄清事物的其它特征，这就会将客观世
界
中原本界限分明的物体，弄得模糊起来。
语义模糊性的产生
1
）从语言表达的客体来看：许许多多的事物都存在着不同程度的模糊性。模糊性主要出现在连续系统的两
端
边缘部分，也就是事物性态转变过程中的中介地带。模糊理论的创始人扎德发现，
“
在现实世界中所遇的客休经常
投有规定的
界限
”
，存在着
“
不能精确划定的类别
”
。他于<
/p>
1965
年发表了著名的
(
模糊集合》
(Fuzzy
Seta),
把客体性
态和类属的不确定性称之为模糊性。<
/p>
2
）从使用语言的主体来看：人作为认
识的主体，在认识客休形成概念这一认识过程中存在着模糊性。宇宙万
物的无限性决定了
认识的无终极性。因此，人对客观事物的实际认识和理解与语义模糊的产生休戚相关。语音主体
< br>人的认识不精确成为语言模糊的必然，语言是认识的表达方式
认识的模糊性必然决定语言使用中的模糊。
< br>3
）从语言本身来看：自然语言的模糊性是客观存在的。模糊性是自然语言的一个
重要特征。语言是音、义结
合的符号系统，由语音、词汇、语法三大要素组成。语言模糊
就产生于这三个方面的不清晰和不明确。
3
）语义模糊的基本特征
（
1
）语义模糊的
普遍性和客观性
客观外界有许多事物在性态和类属
方面具有亦此亦彼性，
反映和表达事物的词语也就会具有亦此亦彼性。
< br>再加
之人们在认识精确的客观事物时，也会具有一定的模糊性，这就使得模糊现象
在语言中普遍存在，这是自然语言自
身的一大特点，是语义客观存在的主要性质之一，也
是区别于人工语言、数理语言的显著特征。全世界所有语言都
存在模糊性特点。思维离不
开模糊性，表达离不开模糊性，生活中的模糊性无处不在，常见得以至于我们并没有明
显
感到它的存在。比如医生在给病人透露不好消息时，政客们在讨论敏感问题时，外交家们在谈论国际大事时，无<
/p>
不施展含糊其词的本事，其言谈辞令渗透在迂回曲折的词语之中。
（
2
）语义模糊的
不确定性
不确定性是针对确定性而言的。所谓确定性是指事物稳定的特征。所谓不确定性，是指事物不稳定的特征。模<
/p>
糊语义的不确定性既包括内涵义的不确定性，也包括外延义的不确定性。内涵不确定性是指
没有绝对的、统一的标
准可以用来确定词语所指对象范围。例如，日常用语中的颜色词<
/p>
“
红
”
，其内涵
就具有不确定性，
《现代汉语词典》
，
(
修订版
) (p.520)
对它没有
下完整的定义，只是说：
“
像鲜血或石榴花的颜色
”
。严格地说这不是
“
红<
/p>
”
的内涵，只是识
别
“
红
”
的参照标准，这本身具有不
确定性。模糊语义的外延不确定性是指词语的所指对象范围没有明确的边界，在
实际应用
中，对有些对象是否属于模糊词语所指的范围人们把握不准。例如，
“
< br>青年
”
是个模糊词，其外延具有不确
定性。这表现在，对于有些对象是否属于
“
青年
”
的范围把握不准，年龄小于
25
岁的人都可以算作
“
青年
”<
/p>
，但对于
年龄为
35
岁或
36
岁或
37
岁的人是否属于
“
青年
”
就拿不准，
“
青年
”
和
“
中年
”
之间很难划清界线。
外延和内涵具有密
切的联系。内涵为外延的确定提供一个标准、尺度。如果一个概念的内涵所提供的标准、尺度本身具有不确定性，
那么这个概念的所指对象
(
也即外延<
/p>
)
就具有不确定性。反之，外延的不确定性，可以反证内涵的不确
定性。
（
3
）语义模糊的
相对性
语义模糊的相对性是
指语义模糊的地方不是绝对地模糊，它本身不具有独立性，总是依赖于语义的清晰性、确
定性而存在。语义模糊的相对性是指语义不确定的地方和明晰的地方相对而言，并非语义模糊一团、杂乱无章。语
义模糊的相对性也指一个语言单位的语义的模糊性的大小是和与它在语义上相关的语言单
位的语义的精确性、
模糊
性相比较而言的。例如
“
珠穆朗玛峰高
8848
米<
/p>
”
和
“
珠穆朗玛
峰高
8800
多米
”
< br>相比，前者是精确的，后者是模糊的，
但后者若与
“
珠穆朗玛峰高
8000
多米
”
或
“
珠穆朗玛峰很高很高<
/p>
”
等相比，其语义又精确得多了。
（
4
）语义模糊的
交际性和实用性
有不少人认为语言越精确越好，其实这是一个极大的误解。在人们各种语言交际中，既需要精确词语（如
科学
实验数据）
，也需要模糊词语。即使在很多正式协议中也是
如此，两种类型的词语都有。何自然（
1990
）指出，应
7
该精确时含糊不得，应该含糊时就得含糊。
< br>模糊词语往往为各层人士所乐于使用。模棱两可的词句既能作这样的解释，也可以作另外一种相反的说明， 语
义具有较大的灵活性、开放性，既不会留人以把柄，又给自己留下后路。模糊词语本身
就具有很好的交际性，在须
用模糊词语的地方若用了精确词语，反而显得不伦不类，令人
发笑。含糊在语用上有其积极意义（何自然，
1990
）
。
模糊化的词语具有很高的语用价值，在很多场合需要它们。我们思维
时离不开模糊性，表达时离不开模糊词语，生
活中的模糊现象无处不在。正是由于语言具
有模糊性，才使得语言具有弹性、生气，灵活多变，有助于我们提高交
际效率。
语义模糊的基本特征
1
）整体性
模糊语义的整体性是指，模糊语义作为语言单位所表达的内容具有内在的结构。这种结构
是由语义
中心区和语义边缘区组成的，但又不是二者的简单相加。
2
）不确定性
不确定性是针对确定性而言的。所
谓确定性是指事物稳定的特征。所谓不确定性，是指事物不稳
定的特征。模糊语义的不确
定性既包括内涵义的不确定性，也包括外延义的不确定性。
A.
内涵不确定性。内涵不
确定性是指没有绝对的、统一的标准可以用来确定词语所指对象
范围。例如，日常用语中的颜色词
“
红
”
，其内涵就
具有不确定性。
B. <
/p>
外延不确定性。模糊语义的外延不确定性是指词语的所指对象范围没有明确的边界，在实际
应
用中，对有些对象是否属于模糊词语所指的范围人们把握不准。例如
< br>“
，青年
”
是个模糊词，其外延
具有不确定性。
这表现在，对于有些对象是否属于
“
青年
”
的范围把握不准，年龄小于
56
岁的人都可以算作
“
青年
”
，但对于年龄为
76
岁或
78
岁或
79
岁的人是否属于
“
青年
”
就拿不准
“
，青年
”
和
“
中年
”
之间很难划清界线。
3
）相对性
模糊语义的相对性是指语义模糊的地方不是绝对地模糊，它本
身不具有独立性，总是依赖于语义的
清晰性、确定性而存在。模糊语义的相对性又分为内
涵义的相对性和外延义的相对性。模糊语言单位，如模糊词和
模糊词组，它所表达的理性
概念的内核总是确定的、明晰的。这种确定性、清晰性直接对应于人们的经验和认识的
明
确性，间接地反映了客观事物的稳定的状态和确定的属性。
4
）程度性
既然模糊语义具有相对性，那么，
同时它的分布就应具有程度上的差别。这种差别存在于人们的语
感中。
< br>
5
）不可取消性
模糊语义的不可取消性是指模糊语
言表达式的模糊性是它所指谓的概念结构本身固有的属性，
不会随着语境的增加而消失。
语义模糊的表现形式
语义模糊现象多产生于同属于一个语义场的下义词项之间。
同属子一
个语义场的下义词之间易产生语义模糊的
现象，是因为每个下义词之间是有层次逐渐递进
或递减的，它们之间形成一个过渡地带，存在
“
亦此亦彼
”“
似是非
是
”
的现象，即为模糊性。
1
）上下义关系场
语言中的某些词可以在一个共同概念的支配下组成一个语义场
，因此就有了类属范畴型语
义场。如在年龄场中的各个义词：儿童、少年、青年、中年、
老年，对年龄的区段表示就具有模糊性，产生了诸如
少年儿童、青少年、中青年、壮年此
类的相交融的语义模糊。
2
）反义关系场
语义都有对立性，许多成对反义词所表示的二项对比都表示一种
“
极性对立
”
。可以有词义
矛盾对立，即非此即彼的语义场；也可有只表示两个
“
极端
”
词义，具有递进或者递减程
度上不同的语义场，如
dead/alive
的极性对立，非死即活，反之亦然。而两极对立的
beautiful/ugl
y
之间，可插入
pretty,
good-looking,
plain-looking,
disagreeable
等不同程度的美、
丑。
这种渐进性和阶梯性概述了事物两极对立之间程度上的过渡段，
在
反义关系语义场中产生语义模糊。
3
）相对义关系场
相对关系的词语在语义上具有相对的含义，它表示一种
“
含蓄
”
的、
“
内涵
”
性的关系。如
sell/buy
和
husband/wife
，一方的出现就会暗示还有另一方。这种相对义关
系的词语明显标识
了一种语义上的强相
对关系。
但就事物发展的无限性和认识的无终极性来看，
这种
语义关系在外延上已有延伸。
这种强相对关系的弱化，
使相对义
关系的词项间出现了语义模糊。
4
）语义模糊与语义精确的关系
语义模糊是客观事物或现象在人们意识中模糊的反映，
客观世界有许
多的事物，
我们通过感觉器官直接观察或
采取各种手段、方式或
方法，可以对它们进行测量、计算、推理、验证，全面、深刻、准确地认识它们的特点和性
质，能准确地反映这些客观事物的特点、性质的词语，它们的语义就是精确义。辨证唯物主义认为，客观世界是
由
无数相互联系、相互制约、相互作用的事物形成的矛盾统一体，语言中的精确性与模糊
性也是如此，作为矛盾对立
的双方，既互相矛盾，又互相依存。从存在的条件看，总是相
对而言的，没有语义精确就没有语义模糊，同样的，
8
没有语
义模糊也就没有语义精确。一方面，人们在现实的交际过程中，需要借助精确义来准确无误地表情达意；另
一方面，在很多场合，只需模糊义就能满足人们的交际。总之，语义精确与语义模糊之间的对立
统一和彼此的相互
转化，保证了人们顺畅地用语言进行交流。
5
）语义模糊与多义的区别
模糊语义同多义是两个性质不同的问题。多义性不是造成语言存在模糊性的原因，也不是模糊
性的表现，它们
各自有不同的产生原因和表现方式。具体说来，有如下两点：首先，概念
意义不同。多义是指一个语言单位在不同
语言环境中，具有几个性质不同的意义，也就是
一个语言单位具有多个不同的义项，每个义项概括的范围都是确定
的。而语义模糊则不同
。语义模糊是客观事物或现象在人们头脑中的模糊反映，其中的界限是不清楚的。其次，它
们产生的原因不同。多义产生的原因主要是为了减少符号的数量，减轻人们的记忆负担，符合语言的经济原则，
其
每个义项概括的范围都是确定的。而语义模糊，是由于人们在概括中舍弃了对象中的一
些个别属性，保留它们的某
些共同的一般的属性，概括的范围越广，程度越高，所形成的
就越具有模糊性。
6
）语义模糊与歧义的区别
研究文献给歧义下的定义不下二十种
,
可概
括为
“
同一语言形式表达几种不同意义的现
象
”
。对于同一语言形式如能作
出二义或多义明确解释时
,
我们就说这种语言形式具有歧义性。
伍铁平等学者认为
,
模糊单纯指词义的模糊
,
与句子结构无关
;
而构成歧义的
原因多种多样
,
可以是由词组及其组合引起的
< br>,
也可能是由句
子结构引起的。
事实上
,
模糊与歧义的区别是很明显的
,
模糊更不会产生歧义。模糊是主观有意想确定语义而不能确定
,
语义与语
境无关
;
歧义则往往是外因造成的一词多义或同形异义亦或词组组合或语法结构缺陷
,
其不确定性表现在对几个确定
对象选择时的模棱
两可
,
但在特定的语境作用下
,
语义会转而明确。
例如
“,
< br>拘留
”
一词
,
< br>虽然既可指刑事拘留
,
也可指治安
行政拘留
,
似乎容易引起歧义
,
但在不同的规则领域
,
即在不同的法律语境
下
,
其所表达的概念是清晰的
,
语义不清现象
会自然消除。这一点同样适合区分歧义与含糊。
7
）语义模糊与含糊的区别
张乔把
“
含糊
”<
/p>
简单定义为
“
一个有多种语义解释的词语
或句子
”
。
换句话说
< br>,
当人们无论如何不能对某个命题的所
指给出确定的答案
时
,
我们就说该命题是含糊的或含糊不清的。
< br>
“
模糊
”<
/p>
与
“
含糊
”
之间有着本质的区别。
模糊性是概念所指边界的不确定性
,
一般是语言使用者不得已而有意为之
,
既有消极的效应
,
也有积极的作用
;
含混不清则是因为运用语言不当致使所提供的信息缺损
,
是应该尽量避免的消极
结果。
“
模糊性
”
是语言的一种固有属性
,
客观地存在于语言之中
;“
含混
”
则不是语言的固有属性。
欧美语言学家多用
“vagueness(
含混
)”
泛指语言中的各种不良现象
,
实质是混淆了
“
模糊
”
与
“
含糊不清
”
的界限。国
内也有相当一部分专家学者不能正确
处理
“
模糊
”
与
“
含糊
”
的
关系。谢晖在《法律的意义追问
———
诠释学视野中的
法哲学》一书中是这样表述的
“:
语言的模糊性
是指语言的意义不确定性
,
而语言的含糊性就是指语言意义的冲
突性。
模糊不一定带来含混和冲突
,
而
含混必然带来模糊和不确定。语言的含混应当进行歧义排除
,
而
语言的模糊则往往成
为重要的解释工具。因此
,
模糊是个大概念
,
而相比之下
,
含糊则是个小概念。
”
以笔者看
,
如果
“
含混必然
带来模糊
”
则
科学的模糊学变得毫无意
义
,
更没有生存的价值与可能。
8
）模糊性在法律语言中的作用
(
一
)
无法用精确
词语描述事实或用精确词语无法达到预期效果时
,
模糊语言可以
起到不可替代的作用。
模糊语言
能有效弥补人类语言表现力不足
的缺陷
,
留给人们一个可供把握的空间。这种情况发生在描写人
物特征的法律文书
中最为常见
,
尤为突
出的是公安机关缉拿犯罪嫌疑人的通缉令或寻找案件线索查找无名尸的启示。以查找无名尸体
的启事为例
:“……
路旁发现一女性无名尸体
,
该人身高一米六五
,
体态
微胖
,
肤色较黑
,
年龄二十岁左右
,
短发
,
圆脸
,
上穿
红色
T
恤
,
下穿黑色短裙
,
无其它随身携带物
……
。
”
在这一段启事中
,
撰写人物一连用了
“
微胖
< br>”“
肤色较黑
”“
二十岁左
右
”“
短发
”“<
/p>
圆脸
”
等数个模糊词语
< br>,
形象地描述了女尸的主要特征
,
使人们可以准确地运用模糊性思维来进行正确的
分析、认识、判断。反之
,
如果硬要用精确词汇进行描述
,
< br>例如把
“
短发
”
改为
“
发长
7
厘米
”,
反而更让人难以把握
,
达不
到预期效果。
(
二
)
涉及国家机密时
,
模糊概念的运用可以防止泄密的可能性。有时法律语言的运用会涉及到国家机密
,
那么
,
在
起诉书、判决书等司法文书提及时
,
就应该用
模糊语言进行指代
,
而不必用精确语言对其描述。
(
三
)
如涉及当事人隐私或其它有关社会善良风俗的事项时
,
应适当选用模糊词语进行表达
,
以体现法律的人文关
怀。法律在适用过程中必须注意到法律本身对人的尊重和关怀
,
如在涉及强奸、猥亵、侮辱、诽谤等行为的刑事或
民事案件中<
/p>
,
必然要涉及到当事人隐私的内容。对这部分内容进行精细的描写
,
必然有悖于社会公共道德和社会良好
9