LB 453-455 T

John Locke (1632-1704) discussed language because he had found that,” There is so close a connection between ideas and words…that it is impossible to speak clearly and distinctly of our knowledge, which all consists of propositions, without considering first, the nature, use, and signification of language “ which he did not equate with reason. God had” designed man for a sociable creature, ...under a necessity to have fellowship with those of his own kind;…furnished him also with language…the greatest instrument, and common tie of society.” To that end man’s organs were fashioned “ to form articulate sounds “and he was given the ability “to use these sounds as signs of internal conceptions, and to make them stand as marks for the ideas within his own mind…” Reading Locke up to this point, one may have gained the impression that he regarded language and society as creations of God. However, he continues in the next chapter:

John Locke 討論到語言,因為他發現思想和語言之間有著密不可分的關係.不可能和我們的知識清楚地區隔開來.因為我們的知識包含了語言的本質,使用方式和文字本身的意義.在此,他並沒有將理性加入討論.上帝將人創造成具社會性的受造物,同時提供人類語言,因為語言是最好的工具,也是共同的社會約束.為了讓語言成為共同的社會約束,人類的發音器官被上帝塑造成是用來產生發音清晰的聲音,並同時賦予人類用聲音表達內在思想的能力,讓聲音成為人們表達思想的符號. 在看完Locke的論述之後,或許有人認為他將語言和社會視為上帝的創造物,然而,他在下一個章節繼續談論到:

“The comfort and advantage of society, not being to be had without communication of thoughts, it war necessary that man should find out some external sensible signs, whereby those invisible ideas… might be known to others. For this purpose, nothing was so fit, either for plenty or quickness, as those articulate sounds, which, with so much ease and variety, he found himself able to make.”[48]

「源自社會的安適和優點,是起因於思想的溝通,人類必須要藉由無形的或者是他人的思想察覺到來自外界可感知的符號,為了達到思想溝通的目的,發音清晰的聲音是再適合不過的了.因為人類可以輕而易舉地發出聲音,並且產生不同的變化.」

So that language had been “found” by man in order to benefit from “the comfort and advantages of society” and no longer had he been “designed as a social creature” and simply been “furnished with language.” Locke appears to have abandoned the conviction of the importance of the social factor in the origin of language when he later discussed the invention of words by Adam. (According to the Bible Adam was alone when he named the animals) [49]. Locke has been extensively quoted, because the widely held thesis that he saw the origin of language as a free act of invention[50] does not appear acceptable without some reservations.¹


所以,人類「發明」語言是為了要能夠得益於社會的安適和優點,人類不再只是上帝加上語言後所創造出來的受造物.從語言起源的角度來看,在Locke談論到Adam發明文字的過程,他被認為是放棄了「社會」這個重要因素.(因為根據聖經的說法,Adam是獨自幫動物命名的)而Locke甚至更擴大引用當時所廣泛支持的論點,語言的起源是自然而然產生的創造行為.


A defender of Locke’s sensualism, the Abbé Etiénne Bonnot de Condillac (1715-1780) thought that man’s first language consisted of gestures and inarticulated noises which were“ based on the construction of our bodily instruments”[51].This gesture language already contained artificially chosen and used signs. But Condillac is careful to differentiate artificially created from willfully chosen signs.² Articulated sounds were used initially to emphasize gesture language. Then sounds came to be used in imitation of natural sounds. Gradually, as articulated sounds were increasingly used, gesture language was replaced by articulated language. This transition was favored by the discovery that sounds are suitable for the expression of the physical characteristics of objects. The first names did not contain any truth about object, for they reflected only peoples’ impressions of objects, not the nature of the object itself [52]. The understanding of gesture language, like the comprehension of a picture had required the application of analysis and the use of analogy. Articulated language differed from gesture language only in one respect. Ideas were presented in succession instead of simultaneously [53].³

孔狄亞克,Locke感覺論的擁護者,他認為人類最初的語言包含了以人體結構為基礎的手勢以及含糊,發音不清楚的聲音.這種含有手勢的語言已經包括了人為的選擇和習慣性.在此,孔狄亞克對於人為的創造以及具有目的性所選擇的聲音有另外再加以區別.最初人類會發出聲音是為了要強調動作.接著,聲音開始使用於對自然的聲音的模仿.逐漸地,隨著聲音的使用頻率增加,手語便被聲音所取代.這樣的轉變,最主要是因為發現到以人體結構的特徵使用聲音更為適合.一個物體最初的名稱並不包含其本質,只是人類對其物體的印象的一種反映.對於手語的理解,就像人類對於物體的印象,必須應用分析和類比的概念.使用含有語音的語言和手語唯一的不同點在於聲音是連續的,而不是同時間發生的.

Although Nature gave man “nearly complete freedom to do as he wills” in articulated language, she” guides us by putting the first sounds in our mouths and we discover other sounds by analogy” [54].Condillac concluded by saying:

雖然大自然給予人類在發音時,以其自由意識為依歸,近乎完全的自由.祂將最初的聲音放入人類的嘴中,並讓我們用類比的方式發現其他的聲音,孔狄亞克作了結論:

“I have said enough… to show that languages are the work of nature, that they were formed so to say, without us and that we, as we worked at language, blindly followed our way of seeing and feeling.”
Language is for man the result of an inner need, just as it is in children. Once we begun to speak, we have to drive to enrich our language with new expressions [55]. The inquiry into the basic principles of language would have to consider first that language which we have by virtue of our “bodily organization.” Once we shall have discovered the principles according to which we speak, we shall understand the rules for speaking any other language [56]. The organic nature of language or its biological basis was apparently not just a theoretical concept to Condillac, for he saw the need to investigate and apply it to the study of languages.

語言對於人類而言,是呈現內在需求的結果,就像在孩童時期一樣,當我們開始學習說話,我們就被迫使用各種不同的說話方式.在探討語言的基本要素時,首先第一點必須要考慮到的是,以我們身體器官的優點來討論語言,在之前曾經討論過我們在講話時的原理,就應該了解到,在說各種不同語言時的規則,不論是從語言的起源或者是生物基礎的角度來看,孔狄亞克的論述是不夠的,因為他只看到了研究語言的需要,並且將其應用於語言習得上.

In the opinion of George Louis Leclerc de Buffon (1707-1788), a specifically active sense of hearing in man plays an important role in language formation. Articulation is considered less important, in view of the belief that apes also have organs for articulation. All people speak naturally, and Buffon is the first to make this the primary difference between man and animal. Man spoke because he had reason. Animals do not have language because they lack man’s ability to think and cannot connect concepts [57].
Even for the author of the “Nature History,” reason seemed to be the most basic aspect of language. However, in the mid-eighteenth century man’s reason was, strictly speaking, not considered a part of nature. A more naturalistic approach is expressed in the “Lectures on the Theory of Language and Universal Grammar,” publisher in 1762 by Joseph Priestley (1733-1804). All social creatures have a God-given way of communication, and languages are like plants, which grow, blossom, and then wilt. The complexity of a language is never the result of design, but is due to accident and the structure of Man’s speech organs. Languages are subject to natural law ,therefore one should not attempt to fix strict rules for its usage [58].

在Buffon的觀點來看,特別是人類主動的聽覺能力在建構語言上扮演著非常重要的角色,清晰的發音則是其次.因為,一般認為,猿猴也有發音器官,而所有人類都能自然地說話,Buffon是第一位將其視為人類和動物最大的差異.人會說話是因為擁有理性,而動物沒有語言是因為牠們缺乏像人類一樣的思考以及溝通能力.
即使是《Natural History》的作者,Buffon,亦將理性視為語言當中最基礎的一部分.然而,在18世紀中葉,人類的理性,更嚴格地說,不再被視為本質的一部分,在1762年,Joseph Priestley所出版的”Lectures on the Theory of Language and Universal Grammar”「語言理論.普遍語法」中,自然主義可見一斑.人類擁有上帝所賦予的溝通的天賦,而語言就像植物一樣,會成長,茁壯,凋零.語言之所以會複雜是由於人類發音器官的內部結構.語言是屬於自然法則的一部分,任何人都不應該企圖用嚴格的規則去規範它的用法.