Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||漢語動結結構句法與語義研究 = A study of resultative constructions in Mandarin Chinese|
|Authors:||Wang, Lingling (王玲玲)|
|Keywords:||Chinese language -- Verb phrase|
Chinese language -- Syntax
Hong Kong Polytechnic University -- Dissertations
|Publisher:||The Hong Kong Polytechnic University|
總結黃正德( 1988) 對"得"字補語句的研究，提出文章的一個中心論點: 詞的使動用法、使動結構、有使動用法的"v -得”結構以及有使動用法的動結結構等役格類謂語的內在聯係，在於結構上含有一個實實在在的使役動詞，或者一個零形式(即不具備語音形式)的使役動詞。黃( 1988) 指出有使動用法的"v -得”結構含有一個零形式的使役動詞，但沒有將這種分析貫徹到有使動用法的動結結構。
第二章探討動結結構的語義類型。按動V 與結V 語義指向的異同分為同指結構與異指結構。同指異指分類是動結結構語義最基礎的分類。按語義指向, 動結結構有十種語義模式，分別對應于六種謂語: 作格謂語、非作格謂語、役格謂語、賓格謂語、假被動句和前置賓語句。其中假被動句和前置賓語句是由同指或者異指的賓格謂語轉換 (alternate) 來的。
第三章首先介紹了句子結構的三個基本組成部分(CP、IP 和VP)、結構的生成過程、題元指派及移位原則。隨之討論了使動結構、詞的使動用法和有使動用法的“v-得"結構。使動結構是一個由使役動詞短語(vp) 和謂語短語(VP)組成的套組結構(VP-Shell )。按照使役動詞指派致事題元的原則，獨立致事主語生成在vp 的標定語位; 而施事或者客事改作的致事要從VP 移位到 vp 的標定語位,以便充當致事主語，在結構上，使役動詞指派致事題元，謂語動詞指派施事、客事或者其它題元。 如果使役動詞為零形式，它不能單獨存在於句子之中，所以謂語動詞移上去與之結合。
第四 章分析了六種含動結結構的謂語，包括句子結構的生成過程、核心詞移位與題元角色指派。同上，役格謂語的致事題元是由零使役動詞指派的，獨立致事直接生成在零使役動詞的標定語位，由施事或者客事改作的致事則要移位到這個標定語位。賓格謂語分同指型與異指型，兩者又各分三個小類。作格謂語與異格謂語結構上有某種聯係，作格謂語是由異格謂語變換( alternate )而來。 非作格謂語的結V 短語同接是動V 短語的補足語，只是我們將動V 短語處理為非作格結構。 假被動句的主語我們視為空代詞.不可以移位，所以結V 的主語移到IP 。前置賓語句的賓語在焦點短語中。
第五章討論了歧義句與重動句。歧義句有三種:同指異指兼類的賓格謂語、客事改作致事主語的役格謂語、以及施事和客事都能改作致事主語的役格謂語。是為歧義產生之原因。歧義句代表了第五章中分析的有關不同結構，是為解釋歧義之方法。 重動句的表層形式是"S元+ VI + 0 元+ VI + V2 (+ Ol 元) ".其中第一個Vl 又稱為重動詞(verb copying) 。重動詞及其賓語( VI + O 元)我們看作次話題.它的結構位置在IP 與vp 之間。
The current study investigates the semantic properties and the syntactic structures of resultative constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Such constructions are very productive in the language and take the V-V form where the second V serves as a resultative complement to the first one. Previous studies fall into two approaches: treating the construction as a lexical compound or as a syntactically generated structure. The syntactic approach is further divided into treating the construction as a syntactically generated lexical structure or as a complex of predicates. The current study argues for the complex predicate approach and, based on fresh data and new evidence, has provided more adequate and more comprehensive analyses than was attempted before. A summary of the chapters of the thesis is as follows: Chapter 1 gives a critical review of the previous representative treatments and at the same time outlines the issues that the current study will investigate in its own course. It is observed that the basic issues are the same facing the lexical and the syntactical approach. The issues are, firstly, how to categorize the different types of V-V constructions, and secondly how to describe and explain the ways these constructions are derived in grammar. The lexical approach hinges on morphology for resolving both issues but fails, crucially, to distinguish causative predicates from accusative ones. The fact that causative predicates must contain a causative light verb (lexical or null) while accusative predicates do not do so argues, among other things, for deriving V-V constructions as complex predicates in syntax. Chapter 2 conducts a detailed and comprehensive semantic classification of V-V resultative constructions, which exhibit as many as ten distinct thematic as well as referential patterns, correlating to different types of predication. i.e. the ergatives, the unergatives, the accusatives (including the co-referential and the cross-referential types, the so-called pseudo-passives and the object-fronting sentences), and the causatives (ranging from an independent Causer to one derived from an Agent/Theme constituent).
Chapter 3 investigates the syntax of causative constructions in Chinese, laying the foundation for the syntactic analyses of V-V constructions in the chapters to follow. The chapter offers a uniformed analysis to periphrastic as well as lexical causative constructions. The theoretical thrust of such analysis is to accommodate the two-tier causative and thematic hierarchy in Chinese syntax, an issue that has universal implications in the study of causatives across languages. It is argued that the crucial factor is to determine the assigner of Causer, which may be assigned to an independent constituent or to a constituent that may have otherwise assumed an Agent or Theme role at the absence of causative predication. It is thus argued in the spirit of Huang (1988) that it is a causative light-verb, lexical or null, that assigns the role of Causer. Predicate verbs, which complement causative light-verbs in syntax, do not assign this role (contra to some authors such as Cheng&Huang 1994). The matrix-verb status of a causative light-verb suppresses theta-role assignment from the predicate verb to a would-be Causer constituent, which then moves into the causative light-verb phrase to receive the role of Causer. Such analysis consequently explains why causativity overrides thematicity (without violating the Theta-Criterion) and why a constituent assuming the Causer role always occurs as (structural) subject, irrespective of its thematic relation to the predicate verb (cf. Grimshaw 1990). Besides unifying Chinese periphrastic and lexical causatives in a principled analysis, the chapter also makes a distinction in syntactic structure between agentive-causatives and nonagentive-causatives as well as between causative and accusative predicates. Chapter 4 conducts a systematic and comprehensive syntactic analysis of the V-V resultative construction, on the basis of the discussions in the foregoing chapters and of further technical reviews of previous representative treatments. All types of construction that have been semantically classified in Chapter 3 are now syntactically analyzed. Evidence is presented to show that it is not only intuitively possible but also derivationally necessary to generate these constructions as complex predicates headed by two separate verbs. As a result, we are able to distinguish one type or sub-type of the construction from another type or sub-type, both in thematic as well as in syntactic structure, a result that was not descriptively or structurally demonstrated or reported before. Chapter 5 examines V-V constructions of ambiguity and those co-occurring with an additional VP headed by a duplicated copy of the first verb of V-V (known as verb-copying constructions). Ambiguity is resulted from cross-interpretations between (a) co-referential and cross-referential constructions, (b) accusative and causative predicates, or (c) Causer derived from an Agent and from a Theme. Since the syntactic structures of these constructions have already been resolved in Chapter 5, the ambiguity in question is consequently resolved in the principled way which has been demonstrated in Chapter 5 for analyzing the syntax of V-V constructions. In verb-copying, it is argued that the V-V construction subordinates rather than coordinates the additional VP, which functions as a secondary topic. Chapter 6 argues that the V-V resultative construction might have evolved from two "routes' instead of one as previously thought. Namely, the so-called co-referential construction "NP1 V-V NP2" where NP1 is the subject of both verbs might have evolved from a different "route" from one under which the so-called cross-referential construction was developed where NPl and NP2 are the subjects of the respective verbs. Chapter 7 summaries the major findings of the current study, and their theoretical and empirical implications.
|Description:||221 p. : ill. ; 30 cm.|
PolyU Library Call No.: [THS] LG51 .H577P CBS 2001 Wang
|Rights:||All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Thesis|
Show full item record
Files in This Item:
|b15574088_link.htm||For PolyU Users||161 B||HTML||View/Open|
|b15574088_ir.pdf||For All Users (Non-printable)||8.47 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Checked on Jan 31, 2016
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.