漢語(yǔ)名詞動(dòng)用中的句法機(jī)制研究

前言

　　中國(guó)人重視事物的功能勝過(guò)重視事物的形式。舉個(gè)例子，中國(guó)人管所有能載會(huì)跑的交通工具叫“車”，如火車、卡車、轎車、三輪車、自行車、手推車等。西方人則不同，他們更注重事物的形式，中國(guó)人眼中的各種“車”在他們看來(lái)差別非常大，分別被叫做train、truck、car、tricycle、bike、cart等。顯然，中國(guó)人喜歡根據(jù)事物的功能來(lái)給事物命名，西方人傾向于根據(jù)事物的形式給事物命名。有一外星人造訪地球，功能至上的中國(guó)人最可能問(wèn)的第一個(gè)問(wèn)題是“它是干什么的”，崇尚形式的西方人最可能問(wèn)的第一個(gè)問(wèn)題是“它是什么樣的”。接下去，中國(guó)人的第二個(gè)問(wèn)題最有可能是“怎樣用它干點(diǎn)什么”，西方人的第二個(gè)問(wèn)題最有可能是“它為什么長(zhǎng)這樣”。再下去，中國(guó)人會(huì)想方設(shè)法把它派上用場(chǎng)，管它長(zhǎng)什么樣呢；而西方人會(huì)死鉆牛角尖，非搞清楚它的來(lái)龍去脈不可，并創(chuàng)立一門新的學(xué)問(wèn)，叫“外星人形態(tài)學(xué)”?！　≈形鞣竭@種認(rèn)知傾向上的差異也反映在對(duì)人類語(yǔ)言的態(tài)度和研究上。在古代，中國(guó)人考字訓(xùn)詁，說(shuō)文解字，被視為“小學(xué)”，研讀諸子百家的學(xué)說(shuō)典籍才算“大學(xué)”?！靶W(xué)”為“大學(xué)”服務(wù)，是應(yīng)用而生的，具有功利色彩。“小學(xué)”是中國(guó)從先秦到清朝的整個(gè)封建時(shí)代主要的以語(yǔ)言為對(duì)象的學(xué)術(shù)活動(dòng)，勉強(qiáng)算得上“語(yǔ)文學(xué)”，還不是真正意義上的“語(yǔ)言學(xué)”。而在同一時(shí)期，西方人基于古希臘語(yǔ)和拉丁語(yǔ)創(chuàng)立了語(yǔ)法學(xué)，熱衷于對(duì)語(yǔ)言的形式和結(jié)構(gòu)“說(shuō)三道四”；19世紀(jì)興起的歷史比較語(yǔ)言學(xué)也是根據(jù)語(yǔ)言的形式和結(jié)構(gòu)對(duì)亞歐廣大地理范圍內(nèi)的多種語(yǔ)言進(jìn)行歷時(shí)和共時(shí)的比較研究。西方人關(guān)注語(yǔ)言的形式和結(jié)構(gòu)，功利性不強(qiáng)，更有“為學(xué)術(shù)而學(xué)術(shù)”的味道。到了20世紀(jì)，現(xiàn)代語(yǔ)言學(xué)隨著索緒爾的《普通語(yǔ)言學(xué)》的出版而誕生。短短幾十年中，西方的語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究流派紛呈，有社會(huì)學(xué)視角的、人類學(xué)視角的、心理學(xué)視角的、功能主義視角的、形式主義視角的等。可是從50年代起，隨著喬姆斯基的生成語(yǔ)法理論的問(wèn)世，形式主義的語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究成了西方語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究的主流，這一傳統(tǒng)一直延續(xù)到今天?，F(xiàn)代語(yǔ)言學(xué)比較系統(tǒng)地被引進(jìn)中國(guó)主要是改革開(kāi)放以后。

內(nèi)容概要

漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞可以從“構(gòu)詞—句法”的角度得到合理的分析，該分析選取的理論框架包括一條顯性的句法操作和兩種輕語(yǔ)類。前者是指動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移，即動(dòng)詞中心語(yǔ)移位時(shí)，可能連帶其補(bǔ)語(yǔ)中除指示語(yǔ)外的部分并移；該操作作為一種選擇性的動(dòng)詞移位方式，在一定的允準(zhǔn)條件下發(fā)生，得到廣泛的經(jīng)驗(yàn)支持。后者包括元?jiǎng)釉~和虛介詞。元?jiǎng)釉~獨(dú)立于核心功能語(yǔ)類口和助動(dòng)詞，和普通實(shí)義動(dòng)詞同屬詞匯語(yǔ)類V；虛介詞是一種連接不及物動(dòng)詞與其后名詞性成分的語(yǔ)類。    根據(jù)Vendler（1967）的事態(tài)類型，漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞可分為狀態(tài)類、成就類、完成類和活動(dòng)類四種，每一類名源動(dòng)詞都通過(guò)動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移這一顯性句法操作而生成，該操作涉及一個(gè)或一個(gè)以上處于動(dòng)詞中心語(yǔ)位置V的元?jiǎng)釉~和動(dòng)詞短語(yǔ)VP的補(bǔ)語(yǔ)位置上以一個(gè)虛介詞為中心語(yǔ)和源名詞為補(bǔ)語(yǔ)的介詞短語(yǔ)PP。四類名源動(dòng)詞的推導(dǎo)所涉及的元?jiǎng)釉~的種類和數(shù)量有所不同，但推導(dǎo)所依賴的句法結(jié)構(gòu)和句法操作是一樣的?；谳p語(yǔ)類的動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移對(duì)漢語(yǔ)中的名詞動(dòng)詞化現(xiàn)象提供了簡(jiǎn)潔、統(tǒng)一和系統(tǒng)的解釋。    漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞的句法推導(dǎo)為以下相關(guān)現(xiàn)象提供了解釋：①狀態(tài)／成就類名源動(dòng)詞與完成／活動(dòng)類名源動(dòng)詞在數(shù)量上的不對(duì)稱以及名詞和形容詞在動(dòng)詞化方面的語(yǔ)類不對(duì)稱；②名源動(dòng)詞的體態(tài)變化的模式；③完成類動(dòng)詞在漢語(yǔ)中的存在；④元?jiǎng)釉~對(duì)名源動(dòng)詞體態(tài)的決定作用；⑤名源動(dòng)詞的事態(tài)結(jié)構(gòu)的合成性；⑥名源動(dòng)詞的語(yǔ)義生成。    現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)和英語(yǔ)在名源動(dòng)詞方面存在三項(xiàng)差異：數(shù)量上不對(duì)稱（即現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)中的名源動(dòng)詞比英語(yǔ)少許多）；類型上不對(duì)稱（即英語(yǔ)中一些類型的名源動(dòng)詞在現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)中不存在）；體態(tài)上的不對(duì)稱（即現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)中名源動(dòng)詞的體態(tài)特征與源名詞的語(yǔ)義特征沒(méi)有關(guān)聯(lián)，而英語(yǔ)中名源動(dòng)詞的體態(tài)特征與源名詞的語(yǔ)義特征有關(guān)聯(lián)）。這些不對(duì)稱現(xiàn)象歸因于虛介詞P、元?jiǎng)釉~和動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移的參數(shù)變化。三個(gè)參數(shù)賦值的綜合決定了現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞和英語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞之間的差異：前者的生成受句法制約；后者不受句法制約，僅遵循一形態(tài)規(guī)則N—V。正是這一差異造成了現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)和英語(yǔ)的名源動(dòng)詞之間的三種不對(duì)稱現(xiàn)象。    古代漢語(yǔ)中的名源動(dòng)詞在數(shù)量和類型上接近英語(yǔ)，而在體態(tài)方面則接近現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)。盡管虛介詞P、元?jiǎng)釉~和動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移在古代漢語(yǔ)句法中的表現(xiàn)與在現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)中沒(méi)有明顯的區(qū)別，基于輕語(yǔ)類的動(dòng)詞補(bǔ)語(yǔ)并移僅適合于現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞的推導(dǎo)，而不適合古代漢語(yǔ)名源動(dòng)詞的推導(dǎo)。為消解這一悖論，本書(shū)提出一種體現(xiàn)最簡(jiǎn)句法精神的解釋。根據(jù)該解釋，漢語(yǔ)允許由句法特征、語(yǔ)義特征和零語(yǔ)音特征組成的語(yǔ)素或語(yǔ)類，即輕語(yǔ)類，如元?jiǎng)釉~和虛介詞；而英語(yǔ)則不允許這種語(yǔ)類。輕語(yǔ)類在古代漢語(yǔ)中屬于強(qiáng)語(yǔ)類，僅局限于“構(gòu)句—句法”操作；但在現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)中它們屬于次強(qiáng)語(yǔ)類，既接受“構(gòu)句—句法”操作，又接受“構(gòu)詞一句法”操作。這兩種參數(shù)變化合起來(lái)就可以整齊地解釋現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)、古代漢語(yǔ)和英語(yǔ)在名源動(dòng)詞方面存在的對(duì)稱和不對(duì)稱現(xiàn)象。

書(shū)籍目錄

序AcknowledgementsAbstract摘要GlossaryChapter I  Introduction  1.1  Introduction  1.2  Denominal Verbs in Chinese    1.2.1  The Criteria    1.2.2  The Data    1.2.3  Semantic Properties of DNVs  1.3  Previous Approaches to DNVs    1.3.1  The Lexical/Morphological Approach    1.3.2  The Pragmatic Approach    1.3.3  The Lexical-semantic Approach    1.3.4  The Syntactic Approach    1.3.5  Summary  1.4  Rationale for This Research and Questions to Be Addressed  1.5  A Syntactic Approach to Chinese DNVs: An OverviewChapter 2  The V-bar Pied-piping Hypothesis  2.1  Introduction  2.2  The V-bar Pied-piping Hypothesis    2.2.1  Dative Shift Under Current Theories on Verb-related Movement    2.2.2  The V' Reanalysis Hypothesis    2.2.3  The V-bar Pied-piping Hypothesis    2.2.4  Licensing V-bar Pied-piping  2.3  Explaining Some （A）symmetries of Syntactic Domains  2.4  Explaining Some Natural Word Order Phenomena    2.4.1  Adjuncts.    2.4.2  Verb Particles    2.4.3  Extraposition    2.4.4  Inversion  2.5  Deriving Compound Verbs in Chinese    2.5.1  Verb-Directional/-Phase Constructions in Chinese    2.5.2  Verb-Resultative Constructions in Chinese    2.5.3  Light Verb Constructions in Chinese  2.6  SummaryChapter 3  Semantic Light Categories in Chinese  3.1  Introduction  3.2  Light Verbs: Syntactic vs. Semantic    3.2.1  The Meanings of Light Verb    3.2.2  Light Verb v vs. Proto-verbs    3.2.3  Proto-verbs vs. Canonical Verbs    3.2.4  Auxiliary Verbs.  3.3  Null Prepositions in Chinese    3.3.1  Variety and Unselectiveness of Verbal Objects    3.3.2  The Null Preposition Hypothesis    3.3.3  Some Consequences  3.4  SummaryChapter 4  Syntactic Derivation of DNVs  4.1  Introduction  4.2  Reclassifying DNVs in Chinese    4.2.1  Aspectual Classes of Verbs    4.2.2  Aspectual Classes of Chinese DNVs  4.3  Deriving DNVs via Syntax    4.3.1  Deriving Sta-DNVs    4.3.2  Deriving Ach-DNVs    4.3.3  Deriving'Acc-DNVs    4.3.4  Deriving Act-DNVs  4.4  SummaryChapter 5  Syntax-Induced Properties of DNVs  5.1  Introduction  5.2  The Inter-Class Quantitative Asymmetry  5.3  The Inter-Categorical Asymmetry  5.4  The Pattern of Aspectual Shift with DNVs    5.4.1  State-to-Achievement Shift    5.4.2  Achievement-to-Accomplishment Shift    5.4.3  Accomplishment-to-Achievement Shift    5.4.4  Achievement-to-State Shift    5.4.5  Some Caveats  5.5  Accomplishment Verbs in Chinese    5.5.1  The Traditional View    5.5.2  Object-coerced Accomplishment Verbs    5.5.3  Syntactically-derived Accomplishment Verbs  5.6  Determination of the Aktionsart of DNVs    5.6.1  Definiteness of Objects    5.6.2  Boundedness of Objects    5.6.3  Boundedness of Source Nouns    5.6.4  Proto-verbs  5.7  Eventuality Structure of DNVs    5.7.1  The Singular-headedness of Sta- and Act-DNVs    5.7.2  The Double-headedness of Ach-DNVs    5.7.3  The Triple-headedness of Acc-DNVs  5.8  Semantic Generation of DNVs.    5.8.1  The Basics of Generative Lexicon    5.8.2  Generating the Semantics of Sta-DNVs    5.8.3  Generating the Semantics of Ach-DNVs    5.8.4  Generating the Semantics of Acc-DNVs    5.8.5  Generating the Semantics of Act-DNVs    5.8.6  Functioning of Proto-verbs  5.9  SummaryChapter 6  A Comparative Perspective on DNVs  6.1  Introduction  6.2  Asymmetries Between Chinese and English DNVs    6.2.1  Quantitative Asymmetry    6.2.2  Typological Asymmetry    6.2.3  Aspectual Asymmetry  6.3  Potential Parametric Variations    6.3.1  Activity vs. Inertness of Null Preposition    6.3.2  Prominence vs. Dormancy of Proto-verbs    6.3.3  Applicability of V-bar Pied-piping  6.4  The Account for the Asymmetries    6.4.1  Explaining the Quantitative Asymmetry    6.4.2  Explaining the Typological Asymmetry    6.4.3  Explaining the Aspectual Asymmetry  6.5  SummaryChapter 7  A Diachronic Perspective on Chinese DNVs  7.1  Introduction  7.2  Characteristics of Classical Chinese DNVs  7.3  Light Categories and V-bar Pied-piping in Classical Chinese    7.3.1  Null Prepositions in Classical Chinese Syntax    7.3.2  Proto-verbs in Classical Chinese Syntax    7.3.3  V-bar Pied-piping in Classical Chinese Syntax    7.3.4  Classical Chinese DNVs: A Paradox  7.4  A Minimalist Account    7.4.1  Patterns of Feature Bundling    7.4.2  Strength of Morphemes    7.4.3  The Account  7.5  The Extension of Light Categories from Syntax to Morphology    7.5.1  The Denominal Prefixs- in Early Archaic Chinese    7.5.2  The Denominal Falling Tone in Middle Archaic Chinese    7.5.3  Denominal Light Categories in Modern Chinese  7.6  SummaryChapter 8  Concluding Remarks  8.1  Major Findings  8.2  LimitationsAppendixReferences

章節(jié)摘錄

　　Hale & Keyser （1993, 1997, 1999） adopt the position that universalgrammar plays a role in specifying the principles that constrain theconstruction of word meanings though it does not specify wordmeanings themselves. So word meanings arise from the interaction oflinguistic predispositions with empirical experience. Basing their ar-gument mainly on an analysis of the semantic structure of DNVs（such as unergative verbs calve, dance, sing, etc. and "put" verbs suchas shelve, corral, saddle, coat, etc.） and of deadjectival verbs （such asclear, widen, etc.）, Hale & Keyser take the semantic construction ofthese verbs to be completely governed by syntactic principles. A verbhas a Lexical Relational Structure （shortened as LRS hereafter）, withinwhich the verbs relation to other constituents is fully determined. TheLSR itself follows from syntactic principles such as Kaynes （1984）Unambiguous Paths, Larsons （1988） Single Complement Hypothesisand Chomskys （1986） Full Interpretation. "There is no thematic roleassignment, apart from predication; and there are no thematic roles,apart from the lexical relations expressed in unambiguous, fully in-terpreted projections of elementary lexical categories" （Hale & Keyser1993: 93-4）. The formation of DNVs results from syntactic operationsthat observe the same syntactic principles as basic or underived verbsdo in undergoing syntactic operations. Any violation of syntacticprinciples, e.g. Head Movement Constraint （shortened as HMC here-after）, Empty Category Principle （shortened as ECP hereafter）, etc.,would give rise to "impossible words".

圖書(shū)封面

評(píng)論、評(píng)分、閱讀與下載

---

    漢語(yǔ)名詞動(dòng)用中的句法機(jī)制研究 PDF格式下載

---