• 논리연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.253-287
• /
• 2014

영어 'any'는 일차술어논리에서 'every', 'all', 'each' 등과 유사하게 다루어지지만, 자연언어에서 이들은 서로 다른 의미를 갖는다. 특히 'any'는 부정어와 함께 사용되는데, 언어학자들은 이 현상에 주목하고 이를 설명하고자 하였다. 필자는 기존의 언어학적 설명이 만족스럽지 못한 점을 지적하고 벤들러가 'any'의 논리적 특성에 관해서 오래 전에 제시한 철학적 통찰에 주목한다. 필자의 분석에 따르면 'any'는 벤들러가 '선택의 자유'라고 부르는 특성을 일차적으로 가지며 파인이 '임의의 대상'이라고 부르는 것을 가리킨다. 이 과정에서 필자는 'any'의 논리적 특성이 한국어 '아무'의 분석을 통해서 더 잘 드러난다는 점을 보인다. 필자는 이러한 분석이 중요한 철학적 함축을 갖는다고 생각하며, 그 한 가지 사례로 보편 일반화 규칙과 서문의 역설이 제기하는 문제가 'any'의 논리적 특성에 대한 분석을 통해서 새롭게 조망될 수 있음을 보인다.

• 영미문화
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.149-207
• /
• 2010

Written simultaneously with Prometheus Unbound, Shelley's "Julian & Maddalo" is a masterwork of dramatic poiesis, of doubling embedded in its couplets, dialogic debate on human nature and contrasted symbolic emblems. The emblems mirror each other and are themselves sites of generative paradox: the "heaven illumined" but "dreary tower" of the Maniac and the glorious sunsets on the "ever-shifting sand" of the Lido, a wasteland that is a place of self discovery but also of "abandonment" and barren mingling figured, inter alia, in its "amphibious weeds," a trope of the poem's personae. This essay also explores the poem's dramatic structure and various rhetorical devices, beginning with the Preface, a threshold of complex identity disguise that Shelley uses for veiled self-presentation, as in "Alastor," mirroring and literary references replete with nuanced ironies. I focus mainly on the complex figures of liminality Shelley uses to develop his own thoughts (as well as his ongoing debates with Byron) about man's potential for growth in thought, insight and empathy, in political reform and interpersonal and individual healing. Advancing Shelley's most optimistic ideas, Julian, escorted by Maddalo observes the Maniac, -- a living ruin whose pained eloquence reveals the link of eros to poiesis and the limits of the latter's ability to 'transform a world.' The Maniac is the core of muse-work (remembering, thinking and song) and Shelley presents him as its emblem. He also is prefigured in and reflects the quintessentially liminal Lido with its "barren embrace" of sea and land. Yet it is less the Maniac's feeling that his grief is "charactered in vain…on this unfeeling leaf" than Julian's rationales for leaving the site of pain that point to Shelley's final comment on poetry's transformative limits. As the primary haploids of the drama's meiosis re-combine and two of them, Maddalo and the maniac fall away, an analogy I briefly develop and embedded in the erotic dynamics of poiesis, Shelley suggests, as he did at the beginning of his poetic lyricism in "Alastor" and at its end in "the Triumph of Life"that images mislead and delude; that "the deep truth is imageless" and redemption is not in but beyond figuration.