This thesis examines those aspects of language in which syntax and extra-syntactic factors interface. There are three major approaches to discourse study (interpretation of a sentence in discourse): i) Discourse Study without Syntax: Any linguistic phenomena can be explained through discourse; syntax is dissolved into discourse study. ii) Discourse Study Interacting with Syntax: Syntactic rules and discourse functions interact or intermingle with each other. iii) Modular Approach to Discourse Study: Syntax is autonomous, but can feed information into other extra-syntactic components to obtain the final interpretation of a sentence in context. Approach (iii) is adopted here, where a "Government and Binding" (Chomsky (1981)) type of generative grammar is assumed as the syntactic framework. Four linguistic phenomena in Japanese are chosen for case studies of the mode of interaction between syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Chapter 2 examines the Japanese reflexive zibun. The co-reference problem is solved through syntactic rules for the anaphoric use and discourse rules for the referential use. Chapter 3 examines demonstratives. Since they are originally used as deixis, the problem is mainly discussed in semantic and discourse arenas. The comparison between pronoun and demonstrative is also discussed. Both Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 deal with the problem of coreference, which is one disambiguation mechanism in the comprehension of discourse. Chapter 4 examines quantifier interpretation. This problem involves another type of disambiguation mechanism. The scope interpretation being represented in LF, why a certain reading is obtained in the actual discourse environment is explained from the viewpoint of the human attention system (conscious and unconscious). Chapter 5 examines the particle wa, which is most commonly considered a topic marker or an old information marker. Wa marks a certain semantic structure in syntactic representation and such a wa-sentence has an important function in discourse organization. The nature of the contrastiveness associated with a wa sentence is explained in this light. In this modular type of approach, the phenomena which were formerly explained by fairly complex sets of rules have become more transparent, and some seemingly conflicting analyses done in the past are now considered as analyses of different aspects of a single phenomenon. / Arts, Faculty of / Asian Studies, Department of / Graduate

Thesis advisor: John Sallis / Today, professional philosophy is dominated by the assumption that literary language is either merely ornamental or that it even detracts from the purposes of philosophical discourse. Ancient philosophers, however, did not share this assumption. Thinkers like Heraclitus, Parmenides, Empedocles, and Plato all recognized that their manner of expression contributes to the philosophical purposes of a text in a way that does not merely confirm or illustrate what is said. This is why Plato couches his account of linguistic correctness (his only sustained treatment of linguistic meaning) in a thoroughly poetic dialogue—the Cratylus. Many scholars have recognized Plato’s debt to the literary tradition by trying to identify the provenance of his literary practices (such as etymologizing) in the Cratylus. And on the other hand, many have developed sophisticated interpretations of the dialogue’s arguments. However, no research adequately represents the expressly philosophical contribution made by Plato’s appropriation of the literary tradition in the Cratylus. My dissertation engages Plato’s appropriation of the literary tradition by looking at both his adoption of literary concepts and his enactment of literary practice. It does so with a focus on two philosophical questions that are fundamental to the Cratylus and yet have been neglected in the scholarship: (1) what exactly does Plato mean by “correctness,” and (2) why does he have Socrates demonstrate this correctness by etymologizing? The first chapter tackles the first of these questions by replacing the nearly universal understanding of “correctness,” as a correspondence between the semantic content of a name with a true description of the name’s referent, with an understanding based on the concept’s provenance in the literary tradition, a broader appropriateness of language to what is spoken about that I call “resonance.” Each subsequent chapter address a key instance where the standard understanding of correctness (and of etymology’s role in exhibiting correctness) is inadequate—and where an understanding of correctness as resonance makes more sense. The second chapter demonstrates that Cratylus makes positive philosophical contributions to an understanding of correctness as resonance through his own stylized use of language. Therein, I argue that Plato uses Cratylus’ style to express the idea that language’s correctness increases as it is made increasingly conspicuous in its insufficiency, thus precluding closure or reification of what is what is spoken about. The third chapter demonstrates that a crucial argument early in the dialogue is analogical in the strongest sense—that a correct understanding of the argument requires an understanding of the correctness (as resonance) of the argument’s analogues. Like Chapter 2, this demonstrates how language can be made meaningful, paradoxically, through a sort of destructive manipulation. The fourth chapter shows how the standard understanding of correctness cannot be true of Socrates’ paradigm instance of correctness, the Homeric god-given names, and how these names are more correct because they require us to seek their varied and unapparent resonances. And the final chapter shows how the entire dialogue is unified by a brief and previously overlooked allusion to a scene in the Iliad. This recognition provides the interpretive key to understanding the philosophical contributions made by the dramatic structure of the dialogue. Hence, this dissertation provides a renewed understanding of the dialogue’s central concern, correctness, and its central practice, etymologizing. Its interpretation is interesting for what it says about the relation of meaning to such diverse things as phonetics, context, language’s mode of expression, etc. And by demonstrating how this sophisticated account of meaning results from attention to Plato’s appropriation of his predecessors, my dissertation contributes to the growing scholarship that recognizes the philosophical import of Plato’s “literary” engagement. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2020. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Philosophy.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

published_or_final_version / Chinese / Master / Master of Philosophy

論文(碩士)--香港中文大學硏究院語文學部,1978. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 260-267). / Thesis (M.A.)--Xianggang Zhong wen da xue yan jiu yuan yu wen xue bu,1978. / Chapter 第一章 --- 本文研究源起及意義 / Chapter 一、一 --- 本文研究源起 --- p.1 / Chapter 一、二 --- 研究帛書老子文字的意義 --- p.3 / Chapter 一、二、一 --- 尋出老子的本貌 --- p.4 / Chapter 一、二、二 --- 研究秦漢之間的文字 --- p.6 / Chapter 一、二、三 --- 研究西漢楚方言 --- p.7 / Chapter 第二章 --- 馬王堆帛書老子概述 / Chapter 二、一 --- 古代文字的發現 --- p.14 / Chapter 二、二 --- 帛書老子出土情形 --- p.17 / Chapter 二、二、一 --- 墓主身份問題 --- p.18 / Chapter 二、二、二 --- 出土情形 --- p.21 / Chapter 二、三 --- 帛書老子的特色 --- p.25 / Chapter 二、三、一 --- 帛書老子的字數 --- p.25 / Chapter 二、三、二 --- 兩本帛書老子各在卷後卷前有古佚書　 --- p.26 / Chapter 二、四 --- 帛書老子抄寫年代問題 --- p.28 / Chapter 二、五 --- 帛書老子抄寫地域問題 --- p.32 / Chapter 二、六 --- 帛書老子出土後的研究簡述 --- p.36 / Chapter 二、六、一 --- 見於文物、考古兩雜誌的文章 --- p.36 / Chapter 二、七 --- 有關書刊　 --- p.38 / Chapter 第三章 --- 假借字問題 / Chapter 三、一 --- 假借是什麼 --- p.47 / Chapter 三、二 --- 無本字的假借字 --- p.50 / Chapter 三、二、一 --- 本義全彼遺忘的 --- p.50 / Chapter 三、二、二 --- 增加形符成新字以保存本義的 --- p.52 / Chapter 三、三 --- 有本字的假借 --- p.53 / Chapter 三、三、一 --- 後來造本字 --- p.54 / Chapter 三、三 、二 --- 有意或無意而造成的假借 --- p.55 / Chapter 第四章 --- 本文的取材 / Chapter 四、一 --- 現行老子校勘工作簡介及批評 --- p.58 / Chapter 四、一、一 --- 唐 --- p.59 / Chapter 四、一、一、一 --- 陸德明老子道德經音義 --- p.60 / Chapter 四、一、一、二 --- 傅奕道德經古本篇 --- p.60 / Chapter 四、一、二 --- 宋 --- p.62 / Chapter 四、一、二、一 --- 范應元老子道德經古本集注 --- p.62 / Chapter 四、一、三 --- 明 --- p.63 / Chapter 四、一、三 --- 焦竑老子考異 --- p.64 / Chapter 四、一、四 --- 清 --- p.64 / Chapter 四、一、四、一 --- 紀昀校老子 --- p.65 / Chapter 四、一、四、二 --- 畢沅老子道德經考異 --- p.65 / Chapter 四、一、四、三 --- 嚴可均老子唐本考異 --- p.66 / Chapter 四、一、五 --- 民國 --- p.67 / Chapter 四、一、五、一 --- 羅振玉老子道德經考異 --- p.67 / Chapter 四、一、五、二 --- 馬敍倫老子覈詁 --- p.68 / Chapter 四、一、五、三 --- 蔣錫昌老子校詁 --- p.69 / Chapter 四、一、五、四 --- 宋謙之老子校釋 --- p.69 / Chapter 四、一、六 --- 結語 --- p.70 / Chapter 四、一、七 --- 附諸家校勘老子所用底本表 --- p.72 / Chapter 四、二 --- 本文以景龍碑本及傅奕本作對照 --- p.77 / Chapter 四、三 --- 本文論古韻以曾運乾氏之¨®Ơ --- p.83 / Chapter 第五章 --- 帛書老子假借字譜 --- p.91 / Chapter 五、一 --- 只用聲符 --- p.92 / Chapter 五、一、一 --- 見於¨®Ơ文 --- p.92 / Chapter 五、二 --- 增加形符 --- p.121 / Chapter 五、二、一 --- 見於¨®Ơ文　 --- p.121 / Chapter 五、二、二 --- 不見於¨®Ơ文 --- p.129 / Chapter 五、三 --- 聲符同、形符異　 --- p.133 / Chapter 五、三、一 --- 見於¨®Ơ文 --- p.133 / Chapter 五、三、二 --- 不見於¨®Ơ文 --- p.152 / Chapter 五、四 --- 字異而音韻同 --- p.160 / Chapter 五、四、一、一 --- 同音同韻 --- p.160 / Chapter 五、四、一、二 --- 同韻不同音 --- p.182 / Chapter 五、四、二 --- 同音而陰陽轉對轉 --- p.189 / Chapter 五、四、三、一 --- 同音而因入通轉 --- p.190 / Chapter 五、四、三、二 --- 不同音而因入通轉 --- p.194 / Chapter 五、四、四、一 --- 同音而陽入通轉 --- p.195 / Chapter 五、四、四、二 --- 不同音而陽入通轉 --- p.196 / Chapter 五、四、五 --- 同音不同韻 --- p.196 / Chapter 五、四、六 --- 疑為音韻近但字不見於¨®Ơ文 --- p.209 / Chapter 五、五 --- 存疑字 --- p.226 / Chapter 五、五、一 --- 省形字 --- p.226 / Chapter 五、五、二 --- 義通字　 --- p.229 / Chapter 五、五、三 --- 義不通，又無音韻關係 --- p.233 / Chapter 五、六 --- 帛書老子假借字分析　　 --- p.245 / Chapter 五、六、一 --- 共用一假借字　 --- p.245 / Chapter 五、六、二 --- 同一個字用多個假借字 --- p.246 / Chapter 五、六、三 --- 本字又作為他字之假借字 --- p.250 / Chapter 五、七 --- 帛書老子親新見字譜 --- p.252 / Chapter 五、七、一 --- 不見於卜辭金文¨®Ơ文但見於康熙字典 --- p.252 / Chapter 五、七、二 --- 不見於卜辭金文及任何字書 --- p.253 / Chapter 第六章 --- 結語 / 參考書目 --- p.260 / Chapter 附錄 --- 老子帛書甲乙本、景龍碑本及傅奕本合編

趙偉偉. / "2008年10月". / "2008 nian 10 yue". / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 91-93). / Abstracts in Chinese and English. / Zhao Weiwei. / 中文摘要 --- p.i / 英文摘要 --- p.iii / 目錄 --- p.v / 序言 --- p.1 / Chapter 第一章 --- 「以明」之簡介及過往各家對「明」之解釋 --- p.3 / Chapter 第二章 --- 「明」蘊含的意義及其理論問題 --- p.31 / Chapter 第三章 --- 「懷疑主義」及「相對主義」與「明」及 〈齊物論〉之關係 --- p.63 / 結語 --- p.89 / 參考資料 --- p.91

Modern studies of Roman slave subownership have been heavily influenced by Erman’s seminal study on slave vicarii. Based on the etymology of the word vicarius, Erman argued that initially the main function of vicarii was to be substitutes of other slaves. Only in the late Republic did the word vicarius also start to denote a slave that was part of another slave’s peculium. This thesis challenges Erman’s dichotomist view of the historical evolution of the Roman vicariat by arguing that the semantics of the word vicarius was already fully developed in the earliest stages for which written records have survived, and that it remained unchanged during the whole central period of Roman history (212 BC-AD 235). There was always only one type of slave vicarius: a slave who was part of another slave’s peculium. The term used to denote this type of slave has little historical relevance, as their purpose was not to replace the slaves they were subordinated to in the service of the master. If they ever performed tasks in lieu of their superiors, it was a consequence of being subordinated to them as independently controlled property. Chapter One focuses on the semantics of the word vicarius in literary sources. It shows that the term had two different meanings depending on whether it was used in relation to free people or to slaves, and that the semantic and syntactic context made the two meanings always distinguishable. Chapter Two deals exclusively with legal sources. It argues that, in the writings of the jurists, a slave vicarius was always an asset of another slave’s peculium, regardless of the tasks they performed. Chapter Three focuses on epigraphic texts produced by slave vicarii themselves or by the people who were closely related to them. It shows how slaves used the title vicarius to mark their permanent personal relationship to another slave. It also discusses the criteria used by Erman and Weaver in their unsuccessful attempts to distinguish between different types of vicarii in the sources. Finally, a short postscript provides a concise description of the semantic change the word vicarius went through in the fourth century AD, and it assesses the possibility that slave subownership survived in late Antiquity even though no slave vicarii are attested sporting the title.

No description available.