“领主属宾句”的语义特点与句法结构被引量：24

The semantic and syntactic properties of the Chinese possessor-subject-possessum-object sentence

下载PDF

导出

摘要本文运用语言学的新理论,特别是Cuervo有关与格论元的理论,对汉语的“领主属宾句”进行了新的分析。研究认为“,领主属宾句”不是汉语的特殊现象,而是较为普遍的语言现象,这方面英语的表现反倒比较特殊。本文的分析较“领有名词分裂移位”的说法具有更强的解释力。本文认为主语与宾语本来就不是处在更大的母名词短语中,可能有但未必有领属关系;主语最初的句法位置是表示应用的中心语Appl(icative)的标志语。这种分析能够较好地解释“分裂移位说”难以解释的一些问题。 The 'possessor-subject-possessum-object sentence' is regarded by some Chinese researchers as specific to Chinese. Drawing on the data from Chinese and some other languages and based on an analysis of the semantic relations between subject and object, this paper examines the Chinese 'possessor-subject-possessum-object sentence' in light of the latest development of formal linguistics, especially within the framework of Cuervo's theory on appl(icative)s. It is argued that this sentence type is very common across languages rather than something unique to Chinese. Compared with the 'possessor moves out of a DP' approach, our analysis appears to offer a better account. According to this analysis, there is no 'higher-level DP' and the relation of possession may or may not exist between subject and object. We propose that the subject originate from the specifier position of a functional head Appl(icative).

作者王奇

机构地区上海交通大学

出处《现代外语》 CSSCI 北大核心 2006年第3期230-238,共9页 Modern Foreign Languages

关键词领属关系论元轻动词

分类号 H04 [语言文字—语言学]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献20

1Baker, M. 1985. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing [D]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
2Borer, H. 1994. The projection of arguments [A]. In E. Benedicto & J. Runner (eds.). Functional Projections, Volume 17 of University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers [C]. Amherst, Massachusetts: GSLA. 19-47
3Bowers, J. 1993. The Syntax of predication [J]. Linguistic Inquiry 24:4.
4Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program [M]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
5Chomsky, N. 1999. Derivation by phase [A]. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18 [C]. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT, 1-43.
6Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework [A]. In R. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (eds.). Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Hounour of Howard Lasnik [C]. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 89-155.
7Cuervo, M.C. 2003. Datives at Large [D]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
8Hale, K. & S. J. Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations [A]. In K. Hale & S. J. Key ser (eds.). The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger [C]. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 53-109.
9Hale, K. & S. J. Keyser. 2002. Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure [M]. Cambridge,Massachusetts: MIT Press.
10Kratzer, A. 1996. Severing the external argument from the verb [A]. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (eds). Phrase Structure and the Lexicon [C]. 109-137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.