摘要
近年来关于学术国际话语权中语言权问题的研究,鲜有论及学术产品生产过程中学者学术思维层面所使用某种语言的作用。事实上这种隐藏在学术思维层面的语言以及构建于其上的概念体系,对于提高中国学术话语权发挥着更为基础性的作用。如果中国学者的学术思维长期被以英文为载体的概念所占领,将严重影响中国特色话语体系的构建。为解决这一问题,我们提出外在学术语言与内在学术语言这一对新概念。就前者而言,英文目前在国际学术界处于“霸权”地位,中国学界对此已有充分讨论,并提出“中英文双语发表”和“中文优先发表”两个应对之策;而对后者的研究还未引起足够重视。作者以亲身经历为例,展现自我学术思维对语言依赖状况的变化过程,反思内在学术语言对学术创新带来的正负面影响。多年海外学习的经历使作者大脑中建立了基于英文的概念体系,其积极作用是帮助作者获得最新的学科知识;其负面作用是自我学术思维受该概念体系支配,并依赖于此开展课堂教学和学术研究。当认识到这一负面影响时,作者便努力冲破自我学术思维中英文“称霸”的局面,致力于构建平衡互动的中外学术话语体系。这一体系可以为提高中国学术创新提供更广阔的隐性话语空间,同时有利于推进中国学术国际化进程。作者带领团队提出的中国特色外语教育理论“产出导向法”,则是平衡互动体系一个有益的应用尝试。
Abstract
Since the 1970s when the “open door” policy was adopted in China, a large number of new research products published in English have been introduced to Chinese readers. Such introductions not only have promoted the development of the discipline concerned, but also have greatly increased new academic terms in Chinese. Meanwhile, Chinese scholars have not been aware of the fact that the English-based conceptual system underlying the new research products has directed their academic thinking, research and course teaching. The language-based academic concept is the smallest unit in the academic discourse system. Once the thinking of Chinese scholars has been dominated by the English-based concepts, it would be extremely difficult for them to develop an innovative academic discourse system with Chinese features. Recently when discussing the roles of language in the international academic discourse, the languages employed in the academic products are usually examined with almost no attention paid to the language used in a scholar’s thinking which, however, plays an essential role in academic innovations. In order to resolve this problem, a new concept of “language in academic thinking” is proposed in this paper in contrast to “language in academic communication”. The latter refers to the language used in oral and written output while the former, to the language exhibited in the scholar’s academic thinking. In regards to language in academic communication, English has still remained predominantly powerful. The issue of how to break English-dominance in the academic world has been extensively discussed with two feasible policies being proposed. The first is to encourage English-Chinese dual publication and the second is to publish research in Chinese before in English. In order to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of language in academic thinking, the paper takes the author’s own experiences as an example to demonstrate how her academic thinking process has been changed in terms of the language, while reflect its positive and negative roles of English in her academic thinking process. The author studied overseas theoretical linguistics in the 1980s and applied linguistics in the 1990s. As a result, the author had established English-based linguistic conceptual systems. On the positive side, such systems enabled her to gain frontier knowledge; on the negative side, such systems almost controlled her academic thinking, teaching and research. Once having fully realized its negative effects, she has made conscientious efforts in freeing herself from shackles of the English-based conceptual system. Based on her own practice, she has proposed a balanced system in which Chinese and English are interactive in both thinking and communication. This balanced system, the author believes, can promote Chinese scholars’ academic innovations and facilitate the internationalization of Chinese academic research.
关键词
学术国际话语权 /
外在学术语言 /
内在学术语言 /
学术创新
Key words
international academic discourse power /
language in academic thinking /
language in academic communication /
academic innovation
文秋芳.
论外在学术语言和内在学术语言——兼及中国特色学术话语体系构建[J]. 语言战略研究. 2022, 7(5): 14-24 https://doi.org/10.19689/j.cnki.cn10-1361/h.20220501
Wen Qiufang.
On the Roles of Languages in Academic Communication and Thinking: How to Develop an Academic Discourse System with Chinese Features[J]. Chinese Journal of Language Policy and Planning. 2022, 7(5): 14-24 https://doi.org/10.19689/j.cnki.cn10-1361/h.20220501
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
基金
本文讨论外在和内在学术语言问题仅限于哲学社会科学领域,因为该领域的研究对象具有很强的情境性、社会性和历史性。中外哲学社会科学所要解决的问题不完全相同,所需要的概念、范畴和方法也不完全相同。相对来说,不同国家的自然科学工作者的研究对象、研究方法和研究结果都具有较强的客观性。