摘要
动词能否做定语的问题涉及“[X+的]_(修饰成分)+核心名词”和“X_(修饰成分)+核心名词”两个片段,学界的争议在于后一个片段及其中X的定性上。第一种观点认为后一个片段是名词词组,其中的X是定语,它可以由动词来充当,因此动词能够做定语。第二种观点认为后一个片段是复合名词,其中的X是词内的修饰成分,即使它可以由动词来充当,动词也不是在做定语,因此动词不能做定语。这两种观点在20世纪50年代即已出现,近期又分别被重新提起。文章通过对两个片段的对比分析,指出“的”的有无是区分两个片段语法性质的分水岭。将无“的”的“X_(修饰成分)+核心名词”界定为复合名词有助于解释两个片段在句法语义上的一系列对立。关于“X_(修饰成分)+核心名词”中X的性质,文章论证指出,从追求语法描写的简单来说,将X定性为无词类的词根或名词较之将X定性为动词要更优。对动词能否做定语的讨论表明:重视功能性成分的作用,区分语言事实中的一般情况和特殊情况,对汉语语法研究至关重要。
In the 1950’s and recently,researchers debated on the sequence“XModifier+Head Noun”in comparison with its counterpart with the particle de(的)“[X+de]Modifier+Head Noun”.The first view is that the de-less sequence is a noun phrase with X being an adjunct.X can be a verb,so verbs can be used directly as adjuncts in NPs.The second view is that the sequence is a compound noun with X serving as a word-internal modifier.Even if X can be a verb,it is not an adjunct inside an NP.This article argues that the presence of the particle de marks the distinction between noun phrases and compound nouns in Mandarin,and that viewing the sequence without de as a compound noun helps account for both syntactic and semantic differences between the two sequences.Regarding the syntactic nature of X in the de-less sequence,it is argued that treating X either as a root or a noun is better than treating it as a verb for a simpler description of relevant facts.The discussion highlights the importance of functional elements like de and the necessity to distinguish the generality from exception in data analysis when doing grammatical research of Mandarin.
出处
《辞书研究》
2025年第5期72-85,126,共15页
Lexicographical Studies
基金
教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目“汉语词法特点的探索与词法理论的建构”(项目编号22JJD74001)的资助。
关键词
动词
定语
复合词与词组区分
词类判定
一般和特殊
verb
adjunct of NP
distinction between compounds and phrases
syntactic category identification
generality versus exception
