英文摘要 |
Some contemporary Western scholars such as Chad Hansen maintain that there are essential differences between the syntax of pre-Qin Chinese and that of Western languages. For example, subordinate compound sentences formed using the that-construction do not exist in ancient Chinese. Since this kind of construction allows the expression of what are referred to in the Western philosophy of language as "propositional attitudes" ("I believe that p" or "I know that q") , Hansen thinks that, without this kind of expression, ancient Chinese thinkers were probably unable to form similar sentences that express sentential beliefs and semantic truth as exist in Western philosophy; instead, they could only express term-beliefs and pragmatic truth by using a combination of names or series of names. Although the pre-Qin Chinese language lacks an equivalent to the that-construction, this phenomenon is not restricted to the Chinese language. Neither Latin nor Old English permit this form of sentence construction. The that-construction of Modem English evolved from Middle English via a process of grammaticalization (i.e., from demonstrative as referring term to complementizer as functional word). Before grammaticalization, to express the propositional attitudes just like those expressed by that -sentences in Modem English, Old English used a kind of compound sentence with paratactic structure. Sentences of both constructions are functionally equivalent in expressing propositional attitudes. In pre-Qin Chinese, there exists a similar syntactical construction that is functionally equivalent to the that-construction. The main aim of this paper is to provide clear evidence from the pre-Qin text corpus to show that ancient Chinese thinkers had sufficient linguistic tools to express abstract ideas, including propositional attitudes, semantic truth and logical reasoning. |