Abstract
Over the five thousand years’ civilization, scholarship on Chinese views on ancient logic and texts attends to focus on the contribution of early Mohism, which paved the way for all debates and argumentation in the textual patterns. In the Mohism logical insights at exploring the semantics of the terms of language (ming “名,” or “names”), there is a clear formal logic like the Western inference. However, the informal logic in ancient China still exercise an invisible and formative development over the long periods after the formal logic diminished due to the political and social factors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Translated by the author.
- 2.
The Master said, “The superior man dislikes the thought of his name not being mentioned after his death.”(The Analects, Chap. 15).
References
Charaudeau, P., & Maingueneau, D. (2004). Dicionário de análise do discurso. São Paulo: Contexto.
Cua, A. S. (1985). Ethical argumentation: A study in Hsun Tzu’s epistemology. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
De Francis, J. (1984). The Chinese language: Fact and Fantasy. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Freeman, J. B. (2011) Argument structure: representation and theory. Springer.
Fuller, M. (1999). An introduction to literary Chinese, harvard East Asian monographs 176. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Garrett, M. M. (1991). Asian challenge. In S. Foss, K. Foss, & R. Trapp (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on rhetoric (2nd ed., pp. 295–314). Prospect Heights IL: Waveland.
Graham, A. C. (1987). Disputers of the Tao. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company.
Hansen, C. (1992). A daoist theory of Chinese thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harbsmeier, C. (1998). Language and logic. 7th volume of “Science and Civilization in China”. Cambridge University.
Huang, B. (2002). A Comparison of Greek and Chinese Rhetoric and their Influence on Later Rhetoric, Ph.D., Texas Tech University.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem solving learning outcomes. Educational Technological Resources Developement., 45, 656–694.
Kaplan, B. R. (1966). Cultural thought patters in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16, 1–20.
Karlgren, B. (1962). Sound and symbol in Chinese. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Kitchner, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222–232.
Kong, K. (1998). Are simple business request letters really simple? A comparison of Chinese and English business request letters. Text, 18, 103–141.
Lanham, R. A. (1991). A handlist of rhetorical terms (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Meacham, J. A., & Emont, N. C. (1989). The interpersonal basis of everyday problem-solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 7–23). New York: Praeger.
Oliver, R. T. (1971). Communication and culture in ancient India and China. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
Schechter, J. B. (2011). Juxtaposition: a new way to combine logics. The Review of Symbolic Logic, 4(4), 560–606.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (1997). Point of view and citation: fourteen Chinese and English versions of the “same” news story. Text, 17, 83–125.
Traverso, V. (2005). Cristallisation des désaccords et mise en place de négociations dans l’interaction: des variations situationnelles. In M. Grosjean & L. Mondada (Eds.), La négociation au travail (pp. 43–69). PUL: Lyon.
Toulmin, S. (1999). The uses of argument [M] (pp. 97–107). Cambridge University Press.
Voss, J. F., & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. T. H. Chi, et al. (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 261–285). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Hillsdale.
Waley, A. (1956). The analects of confucius. London, UK: George Allen & Unwin.
Wenzel, J. W. (1979). Jürgen habermas and the dialectical perspective on argumentation. Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, 44–45.
Zhu, Y. (1997). An analysis of structural moves in Chinese sales letters. Text, 17, 543–566. Ed. By Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and re-search settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jin, C. (2020). Logic in Ancient Chinese Texts. In: Textual Patterns of the Eight-Part Essays and Logic in Ancient Chinese Texts. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2337-3_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2337-3_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-2336-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-2337-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)