英汉与格构式对比研究
发布时间：2018-12-27 14:56
【摘要】：双及物构式作为一种常见的语言现象,主要表现为两种句法类型：双名构式和与格构式。诸多语言学流派如结构主义,转换生成语法,认知语言学都对双及物构式进行过研究。但以往学者更多关注的是双名构式,且很少对英汉与格构式进行过系统的对比研究。 本文运用Goldberg的构式语法理论在语义与句法层面探讨英汉与格结构的异同,找出英汉与格结构中所用与格动词的语义特性的异同点；并分析其与格结构在句法上的异同点,进而探究两者产生差异性的缘由,试图找出其规律与限制条件,并对Goldberg的与格构式表征图示进行了修改,从而更好地通过联接来说明英汉与格结构的特定角色与句法位置之间的映射。 研究发现如下：第一,英汉与格动词的语义特征既有相同点也有差异性。第二,通过探讨与格动词和与格构式之间的关系发现,汉语与格动词的意义比与格构式的意义突出,而英语与格动词的意义受到与格构式的影响,且与格构式的意义决定了表达式的意义,即英语与格构式的意义表现得更加突出。第三,一些英语与格结构不具有对应的汉语与格句式,只能翻译成汉语与格结构的另外几种句式。第四,英汉与格结构具有同样的论元角色,即施事论元,受事论元以及接收者论元；同样的构式意义：施事论元执行某种行为致使受事论元转移至接收者论元或者施事论元将受事论元转移至接收者论元的路径被阻断；大体相似的制约因素：施事论元要求是有意识的,受事论元要求是能被转移的实体,除非其通过比喻,转喻或拟人被引申到抽象的概念。第五,英语与格构式还能表达接收者论元将受事论元转移至施事论元,而汉语与格构式则不能；第六,英语与格结构对受事论元和接收者论元的信息重度很讲究,但是汉语与格结构的顺序相对灵活。它允许“给+NP,”出现在动词的任一侧,从而使得其拥有更多的与格句式。 英汉民族拥有相似的认知体验和认知能力,因此所建构的语言结构必定有相似之处。同时英汉民族的思维方式不同,英汉语言语法化和词汇化的程度不同,这些也决定了英汉与格构式的差异。
[Abstract]:As a common linguistic phenomenon, ditransitive constructions are mainly expressed in two syntactic types: double nomenclature and lattice construction. Many linguistic schools, such as structuralism, transformational generative grammar, and cognitive linguistics, have studied transitive constructions. However, previous scholars pay more attention to the double-nomenclature construction, and seldom make a systematic contrastive study of English and Chinese constructions and lattice constructions. This paper uses Goldberg's construction grammar theory to explore the similarities and differences between English and Chinese and case structure at the semantic and syntactic levels, and to find out the similarities and differences between English and Chinese and case structure and the semantic characteristics of the case verb. It also analyzes the syntactic similarities and differences between them and explores the causes of their differences, tries to find out their laws and limitations, and modifies the representation of Goldberg and its lattice structure. Thus, the mapping between the specific roles and syntactic positions of English and Chinese case structures can be better explained by joining. The results are as follows: first, the semantic features of English and Chinese verbs are similar and different. Secondly, it is found that the meaning of Chinese and case verbs is more prominent than that of case constructions, while the meaning of English and case verbs is influenced by their case constructions. And the meaning of lattices determines the meaning of expression, that is, the meaning of English and lattice is more prominent. Third, some English and the case structure does not have the corresponding Chinese and the case sentence pattern, only can translate into the Chinese and the case structure other kind of sentence pattern. Fourth, English and Chinese have the same argument role as case structure, that is, agent argument, recipient argument and receiver argument. The same meaning of construction: the transference of the subject argument to the recipient argument or the transference of the recipient argument to the recipient argument by the agent argument is blocked; Similar constraints: the agent argument is consciously required, and the receptive argument is a transferable entity unless it is extended to abstract concepts by analogy, metonymy, or personification. Fifth, English and lattice can also express the recipient argument to transfer the recipient argument to the agent argument, but Chinese and lattice construction can not; Sixth, English and case structures pay attention to the information of patient argument and recipient argument, but the order of Chinese and case structure is relatively flexible. It allows "give NP," to appear on either side of the verb, allowing it to have more and more case patterns. English and Chinese people have similar cognitive experience and cognitive ability, so the language structure must be similar. At the same time, different modes of thinking and different degrees of grammaticalization and lexicalization of English and Chinese also determine the differences between English and Chinese.
【学位授予单位】：浙江师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H314;H146
本文编号：2393243
[Abstract]:As a common linguistic phenomenon, ditransitive constructions are mainly expressed in two syntactic types: double nomenclature and lattice construction. Many linguistic schools, such as structuralism, transformational generative grammar, and cognitive linguistics, have studied transitive constructions. However, previous scholars pay more attention to the double-nomenclature construction, and seldom make a systematic contrastive study of English and Chinese constructions and lattice constructions. This paper uses Goldberg's construction grammar theory to explore the similarities and differences between English and Chinese and case structure at the semantic and syntactic levels, and to find out the similarities and differences between English and Chinese and case structure and the semantic characteristics of the case verb. It also analyzes the syntactic similarities and differences between them and explores the causes of their differences, tries to find out their laws and limitations, and modifies the representation of Goldberg and its lattice structure. Thus, the mapping between the specific roles and syntactic positions of English and Chinese case structures can be better explained by joining. The results are as follows: first, the semantic features of English and Chinese verbs are similar and different. Secondly, it is found that the meaning of Chinese and case verbs is more prominent than that of case constructions, while the meaning of English and case verbs is influenced by their case constructions. And the meaning of lattices determines the meaning of expression, that is, the meaning of English and lattice is more prominent. Third, some English and the case structure does not have the corresponding Chinese and the case sentence pattern, only can translate into the Chinese and the case structure other kind of sentence pattern. Fourth, English and Chinese have the same argument role as case structure, that is, agent argument, recipient argument and receiver argument. The same meaning of construction: the transference of the subject argument to the recipient argument or the transference of the recipient argument to the recipient argument by the agent argument is blocked; Similar constraints: the agent argument is consciously required, and the receptive argument is a transferable entity unless it is extended to abstract concepts by analogy, metonymy, or personification. Fifth, English and lattice can also express the recipient argument to transfer the recipient argument to the agent argument, but Chinese and lattice construction can not; Sixth, English and case structures pay attention to the information of patient argument and recipient argument, but the order of Chinese and case structure is relatively flexible. It allows "give NP," to appear on either side of the verb, allowing it to have more and more case patterns. English and Chinese people have similar cognitive experience and cognitive ability, so the language structure must be similar. At the same time, different modes of thinking and different degrees of grammaticalization and lexicalization of English and Chinese also determine the differences between English and Chinese.
【学位授予单位】：浙江师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H314;H146
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 周长银;现代汉语给字句的生成句法研究[J];当代语言学;2000年03期
2 朱德熙;与动词“给”相关的句法问题[J];方言;1979年02期
3 陆俭明;;构式语法理论的价值与局限[J];南京师范大学文学院学报;2008年01期
4 钱军;句式意义——句法与语义关系的若干理论问题[J];外语研究;2004年02期
5 徐盛桓;;相邻关系视角下的双及物句再研究[J];外语教学与研究;2007年04期
6 徐畅贤;;英语双及物动词及其构块的语义研究评介[J];外语与外语教学;2005年12期
7 何晓炜;双宾语结构和与格结构的关系分析[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2003年02期
8 王黎;关于构式和词语的多功能性[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2005年04期
9 何晓炜;;合并顺序与英汉双及物结构对比研究[J];外国语(上海外国语大学学报);2008年02期
10 何晓炜;双宾语结构的句法研究[J];现代外语;1999年04期
，本文编号：2393243
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/yuyanxuelw/2393243.html
