人类社会中的价值现象与语言密切相关，现代西方思想中普遍的“语言转向”和价值哲学研究的独立化使价值与语言的交叉研究成为可能，元伦理学和结构语言学就是其中代表。这两种研究范式风格迥异，但在回答价值问题时都具有形式化和非历史化的理论倾向，究其原因，与它们各自选取的从语言审视价值问题的理论路径有关。对此，应当选取何种语言视角审视人类价值现象成为一个理论问题。我国价值哲学目前已形成体系化的价值理论，并不断发掘和拓展新的增长点，在价值与语言的关联研究上，我国价值哲学研究展开不足，有必要建构起通过语言视角审视价值问题的可能维度。本文落脚于价值问题的语言研究路径，通过批判西方两种语言路径，尝试在马克思主义立场上予以克服，回应理论问题。

元伦理学采取语言分析的方式研究价值，蕴含独特的价值问题语言研究路径。元伦理学注重分析价值语言的逻辑、澄清价值语言的意义，围绕价值命题适真与否，形成了认知主义与非认知主义的分野。认知主义认为价值语言具有适真性，其中代表为直觉主义和描述主义；非认知主义认为价值语言不具有适真性，其中代表为情感主义和规定主义。元伦理学的语言路径将揭示客观世界的任务等同于对语言及其逻辑的分析，在面对传统伦理学的危机时，选择以语言分析的方式寻求价值的科学基础。它默认语言与世界同构，把价值活动等同于价值语言活动，导致价值理论抽象化、形式化、无历史化。

结构语言学借助价值概念建构语言学理论，暗含了价值与语言相互关联的观点，其蕴含的价值问题语言研究路径内嵌于它的理论发展过程。本文认为这一语言路径由索绪尔初创，经雅各布森和罗兰·巴特的发展，至鲍德里亚完成。索绪尔强调语言是价值系统，要素自身不具有价值，而是在差异前提下通过系统中的交换关系决定被交换者的价值，雅各布森和罗兰·巴特使索绪尔的价值思想从语言系统扩展到一切符号意指系统，进一步明确价值就是价值系统，鲍德里亚将结构价值确立为本真价值，宣称物的死亡。该路径强调系统和关系，契合了当前主流的价值关系说，但所阐述的价值在本质上是交换关系的形式，所形成的价值思想也走向形式化和无历史化。

西方两种语言路径的价值结论与价值思想的历史性流变相背，站在马克思主义立场上尝试克服这一理论困境，形成了马克思主义视野下价值问题语言研究路径的三个展开维度。

首先，从存在维度确立语言路径的建构基础。西方两种语言研究路径都将价值存在建立在语言存在上，从马克思揭示的实践是人的根本存在方式出发，价值存在与语言存在统一于人的实践存在。实践改造客体并使之满足主体需要，这一过程生成了价值关系。实践是有意识的能动活动，意识与语言共生，客观的价值关系不能被人感性直观，它通过实践独特的意识-语言机制生成为意义关系。通过实践存在建立的价值与语言的关联性能够破除西方思想中事实与价值在语言上的二分对立。

其次，从意识维度揭示语言路径的作用机制。价值与语言相关性的存在论基础是借助实践活动的意识性实现的，它要求在意识维度上进一步展开。语言既参与价值意识的形成又表达价值意识，价值意识具有语言生成和表达机制，通过概念化、范畴化的方式，价值意识能动地反映价值存在并不断反思，形成关于价值意识的价值概念和价值判断。语言表达价值意识包括直接表达和间接表达，隐喻是间接表达的重要方式。价值意识的语言表达能够分类为评价型、态度型和规范型。价值意识能够影响人的行为行动，从语言上看，一方面由于价值意识的语言表达本身即是行动，另一方面由于它能够直接引起其他行动或对间接行动产生效果。通过语言机制，价值意识形成价值观念体系，并构成思想上层建筑的核心，作为价值观念体系的意识形态以话语为主要载体和实现方式。

最后，从历史维度呈现人类价值意义的演进。存在维度建立在实践基础上意味着价值问题的语言路径具有历史维度。唯物史观揭示出人的存在与生产活动相一致，生产活动生成出价值关系、人对价值关系的确证以及社会性的价值意识，不同历史阶段上，这些内容在语言要素的参与下呈现出来，形成特定历史阶段上普遍的价值意义。反过来，不同历史阶段的价值意义表达也具有差异的特征。前资本主义社会中，生产活动直接满足生存需要，自然因素的决定性影响使价值关系的确证具有外在自然性，价值意义的语言表达具有神性-伦理特征。资本主义社会中，生产活动出于商品交换的目的，人的发展建立在商品交换的物化关系上，价值意义的语言表达具有商品-货币特征。共产主义社会作为对先前历史阶段的扬弃，克服了人类社会价值意义的外在性，生产活动依据人的自由全面发展，劳动产品是对人的本质力量的直接确证，价值意义的语言表达具有人-全面性特征。

The phenomenon of value in human society is closely related to language. In modern Western thought, the universal “Language turn” and the independence of the study of value philosophy make it possible to cross the study of value and language, meta-ethics and structural linguistics are the representatives. These two paradigms have different study styles, but they both have the formalization and non-historicalization tendency in answering the value question, which is related to their respective theoretical approaches to examine the value question from the perspective of language. Therefore, what kind of language perspective should be chosen to examine the phenomenon of human value has become a theoretical issue. At present, the study of value philosophy in our country has formed a systematic theory of value, and we are constantly exploring and expanding new growing points. However, as the connecting study between value and language hasn’t been promoted, it is necessary to construct a possible dimension to examine the issue of value from the perspective of language. This paper is based on the linguistic research path of the value problem and tries to overcome the two western linguistic paths by criticizing them and responding to the problems raised by the theory from the Marxist standpoint.

Meta-ethics examines value by means of linguistic analysis, which contains a unique approach to the study of value issues. It is the purport of meta-ethics to analyze the logic of value language and clarify the meaning of value language. The difference between cognitivism and non-cognitivism is formed around whether the value proposition has truth-aptness, and cognitivism, the representatives of which are intuitionism and descriptivism, believes that the value language has truth-aptness. On the other hand, non-cognitivism holds that value language has no truth-aptness, the representatives of which are emotionalism and prescriptivism. Overall, from the perspective of linguistic analysis, the task of revealing the objective world is equal to the analysis of language and its logic. Facing the crisis of traditional ethics, they choose to seek the scientific basis of value by means of language analysis. It assumes that language is isomorphic to the world, equates value activities with value language activities, and makes value theories abstract, formal and non-historical.

Structural linguistics constructs linguistic theory with the aid of the concept of value, implicating the view that value and language are interrelated. The language research path of its implied value problem is embedded in its theoretical development process. This paper argues that this language path was initiated by Ferdinand de Saussure, developed by Jacobson and Roland Barthes, and completed by Baudrillard. Ferdinand de Saussure emphasized that language is a system of values in which the elements themselves have no value, but in the premise of difference through the system of exchange relationship determine the value of the exchange. Jacobson and Roland Barthes extended Ferdinand de Saussure's thought of value from the system of language to all the symbol system, further making it clear that value is the system of value. Baudrillard established the structural value as the true value and declared the death of things. This path emphasizes systematicness and relation, which is in line with the current mainstream of value relation theory, but value is essentially the form of exchange relation, and the value ideas of the structural lingustics goes towards formalization and non-historicization.

The value conclusion of the two western language paths is contrary to the historical change of the value thought, to overcome the theoretical predicament on the stand of Marxism, there are three developing dimensions of the language research path of the value problems from a Marxist perspective.

First, establishing the foundation of language path construction from the ontological dimension. Both of those two western approaches to language research base value beings on language beings, while Marx reveals that practice is the fundamental mode of the human being, and value beings and language beings are unified in the practical beings of the human. Practice transforms the object and makes it meet the needs of the subject, and this process generates the value relation. Practice is a kind of conscious activity, and consciousness and language co-exist. The objective value relation cannot be intuitively perceived by human sensuousness. It is growing into meaning relationship through the unique consciousness-language mechanism of practice. The relevance of value and language established through practical beings can break the linguistic dichotomy between fact and value in Western thought.

Secondly, revealing the mechanism of language path from the consciousness dimension. The ontological foundation of the relevance between value and language is realized by the consciousness of practical activities, which requires further development in the dimension of consciousness. Language not only participates in the formation of value consciousness, but also expresses it. Value Consciousness has the mechanism of language formation and expression, the value consciousness reflects the existence of value actively and continuously, forms the value concept and value judgment about the value consciousness by way of conceptualization and categorization. The language expressions of value consciousness contain both direct and indirect expressions in the form of expression, metaphorical expression is an important way to express value indirectly. The language expression of value consciousness can be classified into appraisal type, attitude type and norm type. Value consciousness can influence human activities. On the one hand, from the angle of language, the language expression of value consciousness itself is a kind of action, on the other hand, it can cause other actions directly or have effect on indirect actions. Value consciousness forms the system of values through language mechanism and forms the core of ideological superstructure. As a system of values, ideology takes discourse as its main carrier and means of realization.

Finally, presenting the evolution of human value meaning from the historical dimension. The ontological dimension based on practice means that the language path of value problem has a historical dimension. The historical materialism reveals that man's existence coincides with productive activity, which produces value relations. Besides, human’s confirmation of value relations, and the social consciousness of value, all these contents are presented with the participation of language elements and form the universal value meaning in a specific historical stage. On the other hand, the expression of value meaning in different historical stages also has different characteristics. In the pre-capitalist society, production activities directly meet the needs of survival, the decisive influence of natural factors makes the confirmation of value relations have external naturalness, and the language expression of value meaning has the divinity-ethics characteristics. In capitalist society, production is for the purpose of commodity exchange, and human development is based on the materialization of commodity exchange, therefore the language expression of value has the characteristics of commodity-currency. The communist society, as the sublation of the previous historical stage, overcomes the externality of the value meaning of the human society, the productive activity is based on the free and all-round development of human beings, and the labor product is the direct confirmation of the human's essential power, the language expression of the value meaning has the human-comprehensive characteristic.