1. INTRODUCTION 

Space syntax has established itself as a significant field of research with a wide array of findings related to a core investigation of the role of spatial configuration in various ranges of individual, social, cultural, economic, and other processes. In this research, modelling ‘space’ in ways that via transformation of more or less continuous space into discrete units for study as graphs has been acentral strategy, where the method of analysing these graphs increasingly lies in mathematical analysis related to systems theory. One can even argue that the particular translation(s) from ‘space’ to ‘graph’ is what enables a large part of the findings of the field in that it allows for qualitative and correlational testing of hypothesis as well as investigative work.

1.引言

Translation from material space to graph is not a trivial matter, however, and making discursive what constitutes ‘space’ for the purpose of analysis has been central, where interdependency of social and spatial relations is key (Hillier and Hanson, 1984). This differentiates the fieldfrom many other graphor diagram-based models (e.g. March and Steadman, 1971; Klein, 1927; Leuder, 2017; Alexander, 1964). While translations have been developed in several ways (e.g. Hillier et al., 2012, Peponis et al., 1997; 1998; Hillier and Hanson 1984) and continuous refinements are made (Morello and Ratti, 2009; Bhatia et al., 2013; Varoudis and Psarra, 2014; Hwang 2013), one might note a tendency towards convergence to a particular subset of models, methods and techniques and a tendency to make slightly too quick links between theoretical arguments and applied models. In many practical situations this might not pose a problem, but for the field’s development it is important to closely examine and refine theoretical aspect not only of space-society or space-individual links, but of the particular role of the analytical spatial models and their translations from built form.

空间语法已经成为一个重要的研究领域，有大量与空间配置在个人、社会、文化、经济和其他过程的各种范围内的作用有关的研究结果。在这项研究中，通过将或多或少的连续空间转化为离散的单位来研究图形的方式对 "空间 "进行建模，这一直是一项中心战略，分析这些图形的方法越来越多地在于与系统理论相关的数学分析。人们甚至可以说，从 "空间 "到"图形 "的特殊转换是该领域的大部分发现的原因，因为它允许对假设进行定性和相关的测试，以及进行调查工作。

However, while there is continuous theoretical refinement in the field, there is unresolved terrain between the theoretical discussions examining and explaining the models and models used (or made) in practice, and, conversely, between the way models are made in practice and their common theoretical explanation. This article intends to explore this unresolved territory. To a certain extent this requires deconstruction of both theory and practice, which always runs the risk of a sort of Derridean dead-end or, as does Tafuri’s (1968) investigations, to end up with that since all positions can be questioned no position is possible. While not engaging with the general validity of such arguments, they clearly suggest the importance to more firmly establish links between theoretical 

positions and modelling practices. Following such a line of reasoning, the target here is to move theory towards a firmer discursive ground for analytic modelling practice. The intent is thus not to ‘solve’ modelling in practice but to refine and develop the theoretical basis of the particular link between the geometry of space and the configurational models of analysis.

然而，从物质空间到图形的转换并不是一件小事，为了分析的目的，使什么构成 "空间 "变得有辨识度，其中社会和空间关系的相互依赖是关键（Hillier和Hanson，1984）。这使该领域有别于许多其他基于图形或图表的模型（如March和Steadman，1971；Klein，1927；Leuder，2017；Alexander，1964）。虽然翻译有多种发展方式（如Hillier等人，2012年；Peponis等人，1997年；1998年；Hillier和Hanson 1984年），并不断完善（Morello和Ratti，2009年；Bhatia等人，2013年；Varoudis和Psarra，2014年；Hwang 2013年），但人们可能注意到一种趋同于模型、方法和技术的特定子集的趋势，以及一种在理论论证和应用模型之间稍显过快的联系。在许多实际情况下，这可能不构成问题，但对于该领域的发展，重要的是密切检查和完善理论方面，不仅是空间-社会或空间-个人的联系，而且是分析性空间模型的特殊作用和他们从建筑形式的转换。