对取得类双宾语结构基于语义指向方法的验证

发布时间：2018-03-13 22:30

本文选题：汉语双宾结构　切入点：取得类　出处：《山东大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文是针对汉语“取得类”双宾语结构是否存在使用语义指向方法加以验证的研究。对于“取得类”动词是否具有双宾结构学界一直有所争议。相关研究对此分为旗帜鲜明的两种,反对将其视为双宾结构者参照英语双宾语语义及两宾语之间逻辑联系,认为“取得类”动词后跟随的两宾语语义上暗含领属关系,只是省略“的”字的单一名词性短语,且无法像“给予类”双宾结构转化为“把”字句,意即两宾语之间不具备“给予类”双宾的独立性；而支持将其视为双宾结构者,未能提出任何令人信服的证据,比如朱德熙仅仅将其列入“双宾语”范畴,而为做出合理化解释。陆俭明教授提出语义指向和推理相结合的方法试图为“取得类”双宾结构的存在提供合乎逻辑的有力论证。然而该方法由于更加依赖抽象概念层面的逻辑判断,陆文无法证明大前提合理性,故不能证明为“取得类”双宾语结构是否存在提供证据。本文研究目的在于利用语义指向方法,为命题提供符合逻辑的证明。该方法简单但是有效且目标明确,该方法认为特定副词对于语义指向有具体要求,比如“总共/一共”的语义指向要求只能修饰数量词,而且在数量词之前不得有其他该核心名词的修饰成分；而加入“总共/一共”后的“取得类”结构,当出现其他定语成分横亘在“总共/一共”与被修饰数量词之前,构成V+NP1+ADV+NP2时,出现语病。故此,陆教授认为“取得类”双宾结构得以证明存在。本文认为语义指向的方法切入点新颖,且逻辑推理可以提供具有说服力的证据。但是陆俭明教授的证明对于具体的语义指向功能判断失误,错将事件时间联系错判为因果联系,故此导致大前提出现纰漏,且此次逻辑推理过程依赖归纳而非演绎,论断无法周延。因此本文认为该论证无法证明“给予类”双宾结构存在这一假说。总结下来就是,陆俭明的推理无法达到目标。但本文认为陆文中提出的利用副词的语义指向来判断句子内在结构的方法具有不损伤主句结构的特点,优于传统使用的转换“把”字句法,同时不会像加入“的”字等方法改变句子成分之间的关系。由于中文相对缺乏如同英语的词组语法功能标识,任何诸如加入“的”、“把”之类成分的行为非但不能厘清句子各部分的语法成分,反而会使得结论更趋进于分析者的主观意向。本文将否定“取得类”双宾结构的主要意见汇总为三点,并分别通过语义指向的方法整个梳理了陆文的逻辑并提出了自己的验证过程：首先,陆文假定副词“总共/一共”在修饰数量词时即语义指向目标为数量词时两者间不应有其他该NP的定语修饰；然后陆文引入例子论证在“总共/一共”和所修饰数量词之间出现其他定语时产生语病；然而本文论证了该语病产生是由于多项定语顺序所致。并且寻找出该副词在语义指向中其他使用方法。其次,根据上文的研究,我们逐渐发现“取得类”动词引起最大争议的地方在于“宾语串”(此处暂定,因为此时尚不可知该处为两个宾语还是一个长宾语)的两组名词是否具有相对的独立性；则论证的重点转向证明两者均具有独立作为宾语工作的能力。此时回顾副词“总共/一共”在语义指向中对各语法成分的要求,做出最后的论证。然后,作者进一步对取得类双宾语动词的适用条件,包括适用动词的限制条件、双宾语之间的关系等等做了考察以及筛选。文章首先定义了双宾语必须满足的四个条件；之后针对这四个条件,作者提出只有双宾语之间的关系符合三种情况才适用于此结构,分别是：表达财产所有权、表达成员资格和产品生产关系时才适用。针对动词的使用情况,作者根据之前总结出来的四条原则,筛选出一批动词,并根据动词代表动作针对动词三个论元的影响将其分成六类,分别是：表示动作导致施动获得实物；动作导致与动和受事获得(这一系多不可用于取得类,但并非全部)；动作导致与事获益；动作损害与事利益；动作导致施动和与事获益以及动作导致施动受益而损害与事利益。文章最后回顾了所有四点原则、三种领属关系和六种取得双宾语适用动词。最后,作者总结了文章的论断推理,检验了文章中所采用的演绎推理的严密性,并且对逻辑中未能解决的问题进行了归纳,留待以后研究以待完善。
[Abstract]:This paper is to study the use of semantic orientation is verified the existence of the double object structure of Chinese "class". For the "taking" the verb is double object structure of academia has been somewhat controversial. This research is divided into two kinds of clear-cut opposition, as the double object structure according to logical relation between two English object semantics and two objects, that "taking" two object semantic verb followed by the implied possessive relationship, only a single noun phrase ellipsis "of the word, and not like giving type ditransitive construction into the" Ba "," have not given the independence of the "double object between which means the two object; as the double object structure and support, failed to provide any convincing evidence, such as Zhu Dexi only be included in the" double object "category, and to make reasonable explanation. Lu Jianming taught Give give powerful proof method which combines the semantic orientation and reasoning to fetch the existence of logical. However, because of the method depends more on the abstraction level logic, Lu Wen cannot prove the premise of rationality, it can not prove whether the "taking" double object structure exists to provide evidence. The purpose of this study is to use the semantic method to provide logical proof of proposition.
This method is simple but effective and clear target, the method that has specific requirements for specific adverbs such as "semantic orientation, semantic / total altogether" pointing request only modifies the number of words, but not the other core noun modifiers in the number of words before; and adding "total / total" after "taking" the structure, when other attributive elements lie in the total number of total / "and modified words before she appeared V+NP1+ADV+NP2,. Therefore, Professor Lu believes that fetch to prove the existence.
This paper considers that the semantic orientation of the novel entry point and logical reasoning can provide convincing evidence. But Professor Lu Jianming proof for the specific semantic function wrong, wrong time to contact the event wrongly accused of being a causal link, therefore lead to forward the flaws, and the logical reasoning process relies on inductive rather than deductive we cannot judge. Therefore, this paper argues that the argument cannot prove giving type ditransitive constructions exist this hypothesis. In summary, the Jianming reasoning can not achieve the target.
But this paper thinks that the adverb semantics by Lu Wenzhong proposed to judge method of the internal structure of sentences with no damage characteristics of clause structure, conversion "is better than the traditional use of Ba, and does not like to join" "and other methods to change relations between sentence elements. Due to the relative lack of grammatical function Chinese phrases like logo English, any such as adding" "" "such behavior not only clarify the composition of grammatical components in different parts of a sentence, but will make the conclusion more on the analyst's subjective intent.
This paper will negate the main points of the "double class structure" of the acquisition class, and summarize the three points.
First of all, Lu Wen assumed the Adverb "total / total number of words is modified in the semantic direction of target attribute to modify between the two should not be the other NP number of words; then introduced land examples in" a total of a total / "and modified by other attributive number between words is generated when the errors in this paper; however the errors produced is due to a number of attributive order. And find out the adverbs in semantic orientation in other methods.
Secondly, according to the research above, we gradually found that "taking" verb controversial is the "string object" (here are tentative, because this unknown the two objects or a long object) whether two groups of nouns is relatively independent; focus on the argument that both turn with independent working ability as the object. The review of the Adverb "total / altogether" in semantic orientation on the grammatical requirements, make the final argument.
Then, the author further to obtain the double object verb of the applicable conditions, applicable conditions including the double object verb, the relationship is studied and selected. This paper first defines four conditions of double object must satisfy the four conditions; then, the author puts the relationship between two objects with only three which is suitable for the structure, namely: expression of property ownership, only apply the relationship between the expression of membership and production. According to the usage of verbs, the author according to four principles summed up, selected a group of verbs, and verbs represent actions for verbs according to the three argument will be divided into six categories are: said the action leading to action to obtain physical action; cause and dynamic and patient (this system is not used for obtaining the class, but not all); and what action leads to benefit Action; damage and business interests; the action leading to action and action to carry things benefit and benefit and damage interests. And things finally reviewed all four principles, three kinds of possessive relationship and six kinds of double object verbs is made.
Finally, the author summarizes the reasoning of the article, examines the rigour of deductive reasoning adopted in the article, and sums up the problems that have not been solved in logic, so as to wait for future research to be perfected.

【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H146

【参考文献】