庄子言意之辩的阐释与当代回响

An Interpretation of Zhuangzi’s Debate on Meaning and Intention and Its Contemporary Resonance

摘要: “言意之辨”是中国哲学史上一个贯穿两千余年的核心论题，而庄子正是这一论题的真正奠基者。本文系统阐释庄子言意之辩的多重维度：在“言不尽意”的论断中，庄子揭示了语言与意义之间的结构性裂隙，其实质是“言不尽道”——有限的语言符号无法穷尽无限的道之体验；“得意忘言”则是庄子为这一困境开辟的出路，主张以“忘”的方式超越语言束缚、直契意义本身；而“言非吹也”与“言意不一”则进一步揭示了语言在传播过程中的不稳定性和扭曲机制。在上述阐释的基础上，本文进而探讨庄子言意之辩的当代回响：当现代网络环境将人类带入一个“过度表达”的时代，恰恰印证了庄子对语言困境的深刻诊断。庄子的古老智慧，跳出单纯言说技巧的讨论，直指语言、认知与存在的根本关系，为现代人重塑理性、真诚的交往方式提供传统思想资源。

Abstract: The debate on language and meaning (yan-yi zhi bian) is a core philosophical issue that has run through more than two thousand years of Chinese intellectual history, and Zhuangzi is its true originator. This paper systematically elucidates, from an ontological perspective, the multiple dimensions of Zhuangzi’s thought on the relationship between language and meaning. In his assertion that “words cannot fully express meaning” (yan bu jin yi), Zhuangzi reveals a structural fissure between language and meaning, the essence of which is that “words cannot exhaust the Dao” (yan bu jin dao)—finite linguistic symbols are incapable of exhausting the infinite experience of the Dao. “Getting the meaning and forgetting the words” (de yi wang yan) is the way out that Zhuangzi opens up for this predicament, advocating the transcendence of linguistic constraints through “forgetting” so as to directly apprehend meaning itself. Furthermore, his claims that “speech is not mere blowing” (yan fei chui ye) and that “words and meaning are not always consistent” (yan yi bu yi) further reveal the instability and distorting mechanisms of language in the process of communication. On the basis of the above elucidation, this paper goes on to explore the contemporary echoes of Zhuangzi’s debate on language and meaning. As the modern online environment has ushered humanity into an era of “over-expression”, it precisely bears witness to the profundity of Zhuangzi’s diagnosis of the predicaments of language. Zhuangzi’s ancient wisdom, transcending mere discussions of rhetorical techniques, points directly to the fundamental relationships among language, cognition, and being. It thus constitutes a philosophical mirror that reflects contemporary predicaments of public discourse, providing traditional intellectual resources for modern people to reshape rational and sincere modes of communication.