副词“足足”“整整”对比研究

发布时间：2018-02-06 07:28

本文关键词： 足足整整句法语义语用　出处：《华中师范大学》2016年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：“足足”和“整整”是现代汉语中的一对近义词,意义和用法都存在差异,但尚未引起学者们的重视。本文以“足足”“整整”为研究对象,考察它们在句法、语义、语用等方面的异同,并对形成差异的原因进行解释。全文共分为五个部分：第一部分是绪论,包含研究现状、研究内容及意义、研究方法和语料来源。第二部分是句法研究。首先对“足足”“整整”进行词性辨析,明确二者都是副词。其次,分别从组合能力、句法分布以及句类选择等方面描述二者的异同。组合能力上,“足足”“整整”都能与表示持续性的动词、表示量度的形容词以及数量成分搭配；不同的是在与数量成分搭配时,“足足”既可以搭配概数也可以搭配确数,而“整整”一般都搭配确数。句法分布上,二者经常位于句中、句首,但是在句中动词前或后,是有条件限制的。句类选择上,二者都可以用于陈述句、感叹句、疑问句,不可用于祈使句。第三部分是语义研究。这一部分比较了两者的词典释义、语义指向、语义特征。语义上,二者都指达到某一个数量,但“足足”侧重于“不低于；够；达到”,“整整”侧重于“达到一个整数；完整”。语义指向上,二者都是后指,指向其后的数量成分。少数情况下,“足足”可以前指。语义特征上,二者都表示[+量度][+范围][+已然],不同之处在于“足足”具有趋谓性特征,“整整”具有趋体性特征。此外,“足足”的主观性较强、语义确认度较低,而“整整”则恰好相反。第四部分是语用研究。这一部分主要从语体选择、焦点选择、语气强弱、认知差异等方面比较“足足”“整整”的异同。语体上,二者都可用于口语、书面语,不过“整整”的使用频率都比“足足”高。焦点上,两者都可以做焦点敏感算子,用来突出句中的焦点。不同的是,“整整”本身就可以做焦点。语气上,“足足”的语气比“整整”的要强得多。认知上,“足足”凸显的是“满；饱和”,是一个动态的过程,“整整”凸显的是“全;完整”,是静态的过程。第五部分是全文的结论。该部分总结了全文的研究成果和创新之处,并指出了文章的不足。
[Abstract]:"sufficient" and "whole" are a pair of synonyms in modern Chinese, which have different meanings and usages, but have not attracted the attention of scholars. The paper is divided into five parts: the first part is the introduction, including the research status, research content and significance. The second part is syntactic research. Firstly, the part of speech of "sufficient" "whole" is analyzed, and it is clear that both are adverbs. Secondly, from the combination ability. The syntactic distribution and the choice of sentence category describe the similarities and differences between them. The difference is that when collocation with quantitative components, "sufficient" can be collocated with both the estimate and the exact number, while "whole" is generally collocated with the exact number. In syntactic distribution, the two are often located in the sentence at the beginning of the sentence. However, in the sentence before or after the verb, there are conditional restrictions. In the choice of sentence categories, both can be used for declarative sentences, exclamatory sentences, interrogative sentences. The third part is the semantic research. This part compares the dictionary interpretation, semantic direction, semantic characteristics of the two. Semantically, both refer to a certain number. But "enough" focuses on "not less than"; Enough; Achieve "," "whole" focus on "to achieve an integer;" In a few cases, "sufficient" can be referred to before. In semantic features, both of them are represented by the following quantitative component. In a few cases, the word "sufficient" can be referred to before. In semantic features, both of them denote. [Measurement]. [Scope]. [The difference is that "sufficient" has the characteristics of predication, "whole" has the characteristic of tendency. In addition, "sufficient" has strong subjectivity and low degree of semantic confirmation. On the other hand, "whole" is the opposite. Part 4th is a pragmatic study. This part mainly compares the similarities and differences of "full" from the aspects of stylistic choice, focus selection, tone intensity, cognitive difference, and so on. Both can be used in spoken and written language, but "whole" is used more frequently than "full". In focus, both can be used as focus-sensitive operators to highlight the focus in sentences. The difference is that. "whole" itself can be the focus. In tone, the tone of "sufficient" is much better than "whole". In cognition, "sufficient" is "full"; Saturation ", is a dynamic process," full "highlight is" all; "completeness" is a static process. Part 5th is the conclusion of the full text. This part summarizes the research results and innovations of the full text, and points out the shortcomings of the article.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：H146.2

【相似文献】