预设及蕴含区别.doc

摘要
预设和蕴含有着一定的联系，不易区别开来。对于预设和蕴含，弗雷格、罗素、斯特劳森等都有所论及。本文旨在区别预设和蕴含，并探讨预设只涉及语句的名词性成分，而蕴含与所陈述的命题有关。且预设不是语句中固定不变的，不受语境制约的成分，它是可消除的。而蕴含是一种纯逻辑推理，具有不可消除性。蕴含是语句中信息的一部分，而预设则是信息的背景。
Abstract: Presupposition has so many relations with entailment that the subtle distinctions between them become the barrier to some scholars. The arguments of Frege, Russell and others represent the hard study process of the problems above. The thesis distinguishes between the presupposition and the entailment from many viewpoints. It argues that the presuppositions only relate to the nominal elements in a sentence, but the entailments to the proposition of a statement. And it says that the presupposition can be defeasible because if its being ungoverned by context, while the entailment just is a pure logical reasoning. Taking the theory of Grice into account, the thesis author thinks that the entailment is a part of the information of a sentence, but the presupposition is the background of the information.
所谓蕴含，是指下列命题关系：
在所有情况下P 为真，Q也为真时，那么P蕴含Q。即P为真，Q也一定为真；Q为假 P也一定为假。但如果Q为真，Ｐ不一定为真。例如：
① 王涛的哥哥买了两辆汽车。（P）
这个句子蕴涵：
② 王涛的哥哥买了某种东西。
③ 有人买了两辆汽车。
显然，①为真，2和3必定也为真，但2或3 为真，1可能为真，也可能为假。即从“王涛的哥哥买了某种东西”并不一定能够推导出王涛的哥哥买的是“两辆汽车”；同样，“有人买了两辆汽车”并不一定能够推导出买汽车的人一定是“王涛的哥哥”。1和23的关系可用符号表示为P→Q 这里只列举了1的一部分蕴涵，实际上，一个命题所蕴含的数量是很多的。他们构成了为数众多的背景信息。其中特定语境当中只有一个是与该语境有关的前景信息。发话人可以通过相对重音或其他句法手段来明示该前景信息，形成信息焦点，以便与潜在而众多的其他背景信息区分开来。如：4 王涛的哥哥买了两辆汽车。或：王涛的哥哥买的是两辆汽车。5 王涛的哥哥买了两辆汽车。或：是王涛的哥哥买了两辆汽车。可见，蕴涵与句子语用中的焦点有一定联系。特定的焦点总是联系着特定的蕴涵。从句子的焦点可以推导出其蕴涵。
The term presupposition was first put forward by the great logician Frege in 1892. Leech pointed out that presupposition was a problem that couldn’t be ignored in any book of semantics, for it was the essential problem that semantics must solve. Presupposition is a topic not only in semantics but also in pragmatics. Pragmatic presupposition was first put forth by Robert Stalnaker. Then there were many works on pragmatics such as Pragmatics (Stephen Levinson, 1983) and Pragmatics (Steven Davis, 1991). Some linguists realized that presupposition was a pragmatic phenomenon rather than a pure semantic phenomenon (Stalnaker, 1970; 1974 Levinson, 1983van der Sandt, 1988 Lmbrecht, 1994 Bryer, 1996).
What is semantic presupposition? The definition of semantic presupposition is viewed as a true relation; if P (the presupposing sentence ) is true then Q (the presupposed sentence) is true; if p is false, then q is still true; if Q is true, then P could be either true or false.
(1).a. John married Fred’s sister.
b. Fred has a sister.
For example, (1)b is the supposition of 1a, if (1)a is true ,we can say (1)b is also true. Suppose that we realize that John didn’t marry Fred’s sister, then (1)a is false, we can still say (1)b is true.
(2)a. The King of France is bald.
b. There is a King of France.
The problem arises when there is no referent for the nominal. If there is no King of France, that is to say, if (2)b is false, what is the status of sentence (2)a? Is it in a grey area, neither true nor false? This shows that Q is false, and the status of P is dubious. This is a problem for truth-based theory, known as a truth value gap, which is caused by presupposition failure.
What is pragmatic presupposition
So far, the linguists haven’t reached to an agreement to the definition of pragmatic presupposition. Stalnaker, who first put forward the concept of pragmatic presupposition, thought presupposition, is not only related to contexts but also to the speaker. Jackendoff regarded pragmatic presupposition as the common knowledge or background knowledge of the speaker and the hearer involved in the communication. Ellimore treated pragmatic presupposition as appropriate condition needed to satisfy a speech act. He Zibran once said: “presupposition is the common knowledge of the speaker and hearer involved in the communication. Based on this knowledge, the speaker is likely to tell the hearer something that he believe that the hearer will understand. And also because of the common knowledge, the hearer is likely to well understand what the speaker said to him.”(He Zibran, 1998) The views above are divided into two groups. One is from the aspect of speech act, and the presupposition is regarded as the common knowledge or background knowledge of the speaker and the hearer.
1. 例如：A.John married Fred’s sister.其语义预设是Fred has a sister.例如A.是不真实的，即John didn’t marry Fred’s sister, 其预设仍然是真实的。通俗的说，发话人在讲出句子A以及A的否定形式，都以句B为预设，不难看出区别蕴含关系和预设关系的一个条件，也就是在A句不真实或者说在被否定的情况下，这种推理能不能继续存在。根据这一差别 ，语言学家常用“否定测试”（negation test）来判断对宇哥句子所作的一个推理是该句的蕴涵还是它的预设。把这句子否定后，仍然是真实的推理是预设，更说明预设为真；句子否定后，未必是真实的推理便是它的蕴涵。由此可见，蕴涵经受不起否定测试而预设却能经受否定测试。再如：B John managed to stop the car.我们从句中至少可以作出这样两个推理：（1）John stopped the car.（2）John tried to stop the car. 现在否定句：(3)John did not managed to stop the car. 很显然，从句（3）我们无法得到句（1）这样的推理，也就是说，在句B被否定的情况下，句（2）不再真实，但从句B和（3）我们都可以作出句（2）这样的推理，因而，句（1）是句B的蕴涵，句（2）是句 B 的预设。关于预设和蕴涵的区别一般用“否定测试法”来检验，但随着人们对预设和蕴涵研究的深入。“否定测试法”已经遭到了质疑。目前大家比较认可的是预设的可取消性和投射现象。
2. 预设是话语的非断言部分表达的意义，是说话人看来交际双方都接受的共同背景信息，属于话语的背景意义、附带信息（无争议信息）；而蕴涵是话语的断言部分表达的意义（断言意义），也就是说它包含在句子的断言范围之内，是句子的基本信息。二者存在基本概念的浅层差别。预设是使用一个句子的先决条件，而蕴涵则指两个意义之间存在着个别和一般、具体与抽象的关系。例如：1.小王的哥哥结婚了。1的基本信息是“某人的哥哥结婚了”、“小王的哥哥发生了某种情况”等等。蕴涵都是语句的基本信息。1除了传递基本信息外，还传递附带信息：2.小王有哥哥。这种附带信息就是预设。这种附带信息是语句在传递基本信息过程中产生的副产品，是引导前景信息的背景信息。
需要指出的是，对蕴涵可以有广义和狭义的理解，广义的蕴涵包括预设在内，预设只是一种特殊的蕴涵。
3. 预设不是语句意义中固定不变的、不受语境制约的成分，它是可以消除的。而蕴涵是一种纯逻辑推理，是句子所固有的，具有不可消除性。预设的课消除性表现在以下两个方面：
首先，当预设与常识发生矛盾时，预设不复存在。试比较
A Sue cried before she finished her thesis.
a Sue finished her thesis.
B Sue died before she finished her thesis.
a是 A的预设,但比如B就不再预设a了。
其次，预设在一定的语境中可能消失，无论是直接的上下文、不太直接的言谈语境，还是作出相反假设的语境里。
a. you say that someone in this room will betray you, it won’t be Paul, it won’t be Mattew, and it certainly won’t be John. Therefore no one in this room is actually going to betray you. 本来这里的没有个cleft sentence 都预设着有人将背叛addressee.
b. It won’t luke who will betray you.
c. Someone will betray you.
当然，a 的意思是师徒说服听话人没有人会背叛他。在这里预设又一次被取消。但应当指出的是，简单肯定句的预设是不可取消的
d.Tom’s wife is ill, but Tom hasn’t been married. d句在语义上是相互矛盾的。
与预设可消除性不同，蕴含则是不可消除的，如果企图消除蕴含将会出现语义矛盾。
结语：本文主要通过深入理解预设和蕴含的各自特征论述了预设的和蕴含的区别。预设是借自分析哲学的语言学概念，自1970年起一直是语言学界激烈的话题，其研究方向主要有语义和语用两种，前者从命题的真值条件研究预设，后者则主要研究预设在语言使用中的各种情况。蕴含则是逻辑学上的一个术语。目前，语义蕴含的研究也成为热点之一，语义蕴含问题已成为语义学、语言哲学、语言逻辑学、语用学等学科的共同课题。随着逻辑学和语言学的相互借鉴和融合，有关蕴含和预设的理论日益丰富，不断发展，它们二者的联系也越来越密切。
[1]刘哲. 谈蕴含和预设的区分问题. 解放军外国语学院学报. 2001.3.
[2]范晓. 预设和蕴含. 信阳师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）. 2002.5.
[3]俞如珍. 语义预设、语用预设和会话含义. 四川外语学院学报.1996.1
[4]何自然. 语用学概论[M].长沙.湖南教育出版社.1998.
[5]王扬.语用预设及功能[J].湖北.湖北民族学院（哲学社会科学版）. 2005.
[6]John I. Saeed. Semantics[M]. Blackwell Publisher Ltd. 1997.
[7]吴耀斌. 从语义学角度浅析预设与蕴含的异同[J]. 科技信息.2007.(14):122-123.
[8]Leech, G.N, Principles of Pragmatics [M]. London: Longman, 1983
[9]Levinson S C. Pragmatics[M]. Cambridge University Press, 1983. 167-225