题名

從構式語法看現代漢語動補結構的論元體現

并列篇名

The Argument Realization of Resultative Constructions in Mandarin Chinese: A Preliminary Investigation

DOI

10.6393/JCLT.200912.0023

作者

趙靜雅(Ching-Ya Chao)

关键词

構式語法 ; 動補結構 ; 論元體現 ; 語義表徵 ; 非常規賓語 ; construction grammar ; verb-complement construction ; argument realization ; semantic representation ; non-subcategorized object

期刊名称

華語文教學研究

卷期/出版年月

6卷2期(2009 / 12 / 01)

页次

23 - 43

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

現代漢語動補結構的精簡性和靈活性,不但是漢語語法的特點,也是學習漢語的難點。動補結構的靈活性來自於其多變的、非常規的組合關係,無論及物動詞或不及物動詞,都因搭配補語而能帶違反其次類劃分的賓語,而且有些單純及物動詞加上特定補語後,失去及物性。本文嘗試從三個次構式的語義表徵切入,探索現代漢語動補結構的運作機制。本文的初步觀察顯示,構式論元的語義角色在很大程度上受到語境的影響,而且比動詞的參與者角色更加豐富多樣。如果前述觀察是合理的,那麼構式語法理論如何預測這些非常規構式選擇特定構式論元的語用因素,或許是值得未來進一步研究的議題。

英文摘要

From a perspective of Construction Grammar (Goldberg, 1995), this paper discusses three types of Resultative Constructions in Mandarin Chinese by investigating their argument structure, semantic representation and syntactic mapping. According to the preliminary study, both objects and subjects of these constructions receive extremely versatile sets of thematic roles, which violate the sub-categorization of verbs. This helps increase our understanding of the mechanism of the argument realization in Chinese Resultatives. But the question as to what determines the meaning of the whole construction still remains open.

主题分类 人文學 > 語言學
社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. Lien, Chin-fa.(2003).Coding causatives and putatives in a diachronic perspective.Taiwan Journal of Linguistics,1(1),1-28.
    連結:
  2. Belletti, A.,L. Rizzi.(1988).Psych-verbs and 9-theory.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory,6,291-352.
  3. Bresnan, J.,J. Kanerva.,T. Stowell (eds.),E. Wehrli (eds.)(1989).Syntax and Semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon.New York:Academic Press.
  4. Croft, William.(1991).Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
  5. Croft, William.,M. Yaguello (ed.)(1994).Subjecthood and Subjectivity: The Status of the Subject in Linguistic Theory.Paris:Ophrys.
  6. Fillmore, C. J.(1986).Pragmatically controlled zero anaphora.BLS,12,95-107.
  7. Fillmore, C. J.,R. J. O''Brien (ed.)(1971).Some problems for case grammar.Report of the 22nd Annual Roundtable Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies,Washington:
  8. Fillmore, C. J.,R. Jacobs (eds.),P. Rosenbaum (eds.)(1970).Readings in English Transformational Grammar.Waltham, MA:Ginn.
  9. Goldberg, Adele E.(1995).Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
  10. Goldberg, Adele E.(2006).Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
  11. Goldberg, Adele E.,Jan-Ola Östman (eds.),Mirjam Fried (eds.)(2005).Construction Grammar: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions [CAL 3].Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
  12. Grimshaw, J.(1990).Argument Structure.Cambridge:MIT Press.
  13. Jackendoff, R.(1997).Twistin' the night away.Language,73,534-559.
  14. Jackendoff, R.(1990).Semantic Structures.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
  15. Lai, Huei-ling.(2003).Hakka LAU constructions: A constructional approach.Language and Linguistics,4(2),353-378.
  16. Levin, Beth,M. Rappaport Hovav.(2005).Argument Realization.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  17. Lien, Chin-fa.(2003).Exploring multiple functions of Choe3做 and its interaction with constructional meanings in Taiwanese Southern Min.Language and Linguistics,4,85-104.
  18. Lien, Chin-fa.(2003).In search of covert grammatical categories in Taiwanese Southern Min: A cognitive approach to verb semantics.Language and Linguistics,4,379-402.
  19. Lien, Chin-fa.,James H-I Tai (eds.),Yungli Chang (eds.)(2000).Interface between construction and lexical semantics: A case study of the polysemous word kek4 and its congeners tin3, chng1 and ke3 in Taiwanese Southern Min.Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Chinese Languages and Linguistics,Theme:
  20. McIntyre, Andrew.(2004).Event paths, conflation, argument structure, and VP shells.Linguistics,42(3),523-571.
  21. McIntyre, Andrew.,Geert Booij (eds.),Jaap van Marie (eds.)(2003).Yearbook of Morphology.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
  22. Pesetsky, D. M.(1995).Zero Syntax.Chicago, IL.:MIT Press.
  23. Rappaport Hovav, M.,B. Levin.(2002).Change of state verbs: Implications for theories of argument projection.BLS,28,269-280.
  24. Rothstein, S.(1983).Cambridge, MA.,MIT.
  25. Speas, M. J.(1990).Phrase Structure in Natural Language.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
  26. Van Valin, R. D.(1990).Semantic parameters of split intransitivity.Language,66,221-260.
  27. 朱文輝(2003)。博士論文(博士論文)。北京市,中國社會科學院研究生院語言學系。
  28. 李錦姬(2003)。博士論文(博士論文)。上海市,復旦大學中國語言文學系。
  29. 李馨郁(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。長春市,東北師範大學文學院。
  30. 沈家煊(2003)。現代漢語「動補結構」的類型學考察。世界漢語教學,3,17-23。
  31. 姚水英(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。上海市,上海外國語大學。
  32. 袁毓林(2004)。論元結構和句式結構互動的動因、機制和條件-表達精細化對動詞配價和句式構造的影響。語言研究,24(4),1-10。
  33. 連金發、盧國屏編、薛榕婷編(2003)。第二屆淡江大學全球姊妹校漢語文化學學術會議論文集。臺北:臺灣學生。
  34. 陸儉明(1990)。述補結構的複雜性―《現代漢語補語研究資料》序。語言教學語研究,1,13-20。
  35. 湯廷池(2002)。漢語複合動詞的「使動與起動交替」。語言暨語言學,3(3),615-644。
  36. 趙元任、呂叔湘譯(1968)。漢語口語語法。北京:商務印書館。
  37. 影山太郎(1996)。動詞意味論-言語と認知の接點。東京:????。
被引用次数
  1. 陳俊光,林正昕,王萸芳(2020)。從構式語法理論探究漢語讓步條件句之篇章特徵。華語文教學研究,17(2),131-165。