ABSTRACT This paper considers the ease and the difficulty of adapting the habits of philology to the exigencies of intellectual history. The title chosen by Michel Foucault for one of his major historical studies referred to ‘words and things’, but the relation between those two is not given once and for all. Foucault developed the notion of discourse, which involved articulated sets of words. Discourses he understood to be sayable propositions corresponding to thinkable things. Since the 1970s and 1980s, Foucault’s influence on the humanities and social sciences has been great, and there now exists at least one field of research that owes direct allegiance to his view of discourse: the field of intellectual history. Scholars have come to intellectual history after being trained in a range of disciplines: not just history of various kinds, but philosophy, studies in religion and literary studies. This paper will ask specifically what it can mean in practice to bring to the historical study of discourses a training in which philology has played a part. In the absence of a putative love of discourse, what might it mean to take words as objects of close historical attention?

中文翻译：

---

言语与事物：语言学在知识史上的不确定性

摘要本文考虑了使语言习惯适应知识史迫在眉睫的难易程度。米歇尔·福柯（Michel Foucault）为他的一项主要历史研究选择的标题是“单词和事物”，但是这两者之间的关系并非一劳永逸。福柯发展了话语的概念，其中涉及词语的清晰表达。他认为话语是与可思考的事物相对应的可以说的命题。自1970年代和1980年代以来，福柯对人文科学和社会科学的影响一直很大，现在至少存在一个直接归功于他的话语观点的研究领域：知识史领域。学者们经过一系列学科的培训后才进入了知识史：不仅是各种历史，但是哲学，宗教研究和文学研究。本文将具体询问在实践中将话语的历史训练纳入语言史研究的意义。在没有假定的话语热爱的情况下，将单词作为受到历史高度关注的对象意味着什么？