Hyppolite stresses his proximity to Merleau-Ponty, but the received interpretation of his “anti-humanist” reading of Hegel suggests a greater distance between their projects. This paper focuses on an under-explored dimension of their philosophical relationship. I argue that Merleau-Ponty and Hyppolite are both committed to formulating a mode of philosophical expression that can avoid the pitfalls of purely formal or literal and purely aesthetic or creative modes of expression. Merleau-Ponty’s attempt to navigate this dichotomy, I suggest, closely resembles Hyppolite’s interpretation of Hegel’s “speculative” mode of expression. In particular, his emphasis on the “mediating” character of philosophical language, which moves between descriptive and creative expression, suggests a debt to Hyppolite. This reading provides more evidence to think that Hyppolite cannot be straightforwardly understood as an anti-humanist or post-phenomenological thinker, and paves the way for a rapprochement between his work and the broader phenomenological tradition.

中文翻译：

---

Merleau-Ponty and Hyppolite的感觉，语言和本体论

Hyppolite强调他与Merleau-Ponty的距离，但对黑格尔“反人道主义”读物的公认解释表明，他们的计划之间有更大的距离。本文关注于它们的哲学关系的一个尚未探索的维度。我认为，梅洛-庞蒂和海波利特都致力于制定一种哲学表达方式，可以避免纯粹形式或字面意义以及纯粹美学或创造性表达方式的缺陷。我建议，梅洛-庞蒂（Merleau-Ponty）试图解决这种二分法的尝试与希波波利特（Hyppolite）对黑格尔的“投机”表达方式的解释非常相似。特别是，他强调在描述性和创造性表达之间转换的哲学语言的“中介”特征，这暗示了对Hyppolite的欠缺。