英语翻译In the case of sentences that map,the significant transf

英语翻译
In the case of sentences that map,the significant transformations of the icon are mostly substitution transformations,with the enormously important exception of the negation transformation.(Discussion of negation will be postponed to Chapter 14.) A sentence admits of transformations that replace its most basic parts with parts having direct proper functions of the same type (this is an aspect of the invariance of the sentence form) yet that are different.The transformations are of this sort:replace the subject with "Theaetetus," replace the direct object with "fish," replace the verb with "eats," replace the predicate adjective with "red." I will later show how a phrase like "the man who lives next door'' or an indexical like "this" has,qua adapted to a context,the same sort of proper function that "Theaetetus" has.Namely,each is supposed to precipitate an act of identification of a given variant in the world.Hence the same basic sentence may be subject to such transformations as replace the subject with "Theaetetus," replace the subject with "the man who lives next door" (with appropriate context),and replace the subject with "this" (with appropriate context).Each of these transformations corresponds to a possible transformation of the world affair that is being mapped.Taking the articulation of a world affair,qua mapped by a sentence,to be determined by a group of possible transformations or operations upon it rather than as the way the affair is built out of prior parts and relations has two advantages for ontology.First,consider the regress that produces "Bradley's paradox":if world affairs consist of objects (e.g.,substances and properties) tied together by relations,then we must postulate further relations that tie these objects to these relations and then still further relations that tie the latter relations down,ad infinitum.(This regress,which led Bradley to deny the reality of relations,is the flip side of the problem discussed above concerning the failure of "Theaetetus flies" to correspond to how things are.) But if the mapping of language onto the world is as we have described it,this regress has no footing.World affairs are not torn apart into sets of objects by the mapping rules for intentional icons,hence do not have to be put together again.

在映射的句子情况下,象的重大变革是主要代替变革,有否定变革的极大地重要例外.(关于否定的讨论将被延期对第14章.) 句子用有的零件替换它的最基本的零件同一个类型的直接适当的作用是不同的承认变革(这是句子形式的不变性的方面).变革是这个排序：用“Theaetetus替换主题”,用“鱼替换直接反对”,替换动词用“吃”,用“红色替换谓语形容词”.我以后将显示词组怎么喜欢“居住隔壁"或一索引象“此”有的人,qua适应上下文,“Theaetetus”有的同一类适当的作用.即,其中每一在世界上应该沉淀一个特定变形的证明行动.因此同一个基本的句子也许是受这样变革支配象用“Theaetetus替换主题”,用“居住隔壁”的人替换主题(与适当的上下文),并且用“此”替换主题(与适当的上下文).这些变革中的每一对应于被映射世界形势的可能的变革.采取世界形势的清楚的发音,句子映射的qua,取决于一个小组可能的变革或操作在它而不是,当方式事理被建立出于预先的零件和联系有本体论的二好处.首先,考虑制造“布雷得里的矛盾”的退步：如果世界形势包括联系(即,物质和物产)一起栓的对象,则我们必须假设更远栓这些对象对这些联系然后联系束缚后者联系,无限制的进一步联系.(这退步,带领布雷得里否认联系的现实,是在有关“Theaetetus的失败之上被谈论的问题的反面飞行”对应于事怎样是.) 但是,如果映射在世界上的语言是,因为我们描述了它,这不退步有立足处.世界形势没有被撕开入套对象由故意象的映射的规则,因此不必须再被汇集