David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4 (1):137-149 (2004)
To translate the Aristotelian square of opposition into Chinese requires restructuring the Aristotelian system of genus-species into the Chinese way of classification and understanding of the focus-field relationship. The feature of the former is on a tree model, while that of the later is on the focusfield model. Difficulties arise when one tries to show contraries betweenA- type and E-type propositions in the Aristotelian square of opposition in Chinese, because there is no clear distinction between universal and particular in a focus-field structure of thinking. If there could be a chance to discuss the analytic identity between the two logical systems, then it might be only constituted during a face to face conversation in the present, or, in other words, in the translation of particular propositions (singular subjective,I-type, andO-type propositions) in a particular case. The best hope for a translator is that in the actual temporally situated practice,now he or she might find a temporary way to map the concepts of one to the other with relatively little loss of structure
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Irving M. Copi (2008). Introduction to Logic. Pearson/Prentice Hall.
Ludwig Wittgenstein (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. Dover Publications.
A. C. Graham (1978). Later Mohist Logic, Ethics, and Science. School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London.
Jon Barwise & John Etchemendy (1999). Language, Proof and Logic. Seven Bridges Press.
James Griffin (1964). Wittgenstein's Logical Atomism. Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Bongrae Seok (2007). Change, Contradiction, and Overconfidence: Chinese Philosophy and Cognitive Peculiarities of Asians. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 6 (3):221-237.
Similar books and articles
Larry Horn, Lexical Pragmatics and the Geometry of Opposition: The Mystery of *Nall and *Nand Revisited.
Xinyan Jiang (1992). The Law of Non‐Contradiction and Chinese Philosophy. History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (1):1-14.
Jinmei Yuan (2006). The Role of Time in the Structure of Chinese Logic. Philosophy East and West 56 (1):136-152.
Wolfgang Lenzen (2008). Ploucquet's “Refutation” of the Traditional Square of Opposition. Logica Universalis 2 (1):43-58.
Peter Bernhard (2008). Visualizations of the Square of Opposition. Logica Universalis 2 (1):31-41.
Author unknown, Square of Opposition. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Terence Parsons, The Traditional Square of Opposition. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Terence Parsons (2008). Things That Are Right with the Traditional Square of Opposition. Logica Universalis 2 (1):3-11.
Antonino Drago (2008). The Square of Opposition and the Four Fundamental Choices. Logica Universalis 2 (1):127-141.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads13 ( #280,356 of 1,911,401 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #177,396 of 1,911,401 )
How can I increase my downloads?