汉语中翻转结构的句法生成
发布时间：2018-09-19 13:33
【摘要】：本研究重点关注汉语中的翻转结构，即“五个人吃了一锅饭”（本文称为“翻转A式”）与“一锅饭吃了五个人”（本文称为“翻转B式”）之类的成对句式。 翻转结构因其各种令人迷惑的特征引起汉语语法界的广泛兴趣。原有的一些研究认为翻转A、B两句式之间存在派生关系。在两者中，，动词之前的名词性成分为论元作主语，动词之后的名词成分为论元作宾语。依据该分析，对应的翻转A、B式属于论元成分语序倒转的句子。因此，如果将对应翻转B式句中的主语论元与宾语论元交换句法位置可以派生出翻转A式句；相反，如果将对应翻转A式句中的主语论元与宾语论元交换句法位置则可以派生出翻转B式句。如果类似分析成立，翻转结构则对包括题元理论、格理论、约束理论在内的诸多普遍语法原则和理论构成严重挑战。 本论文的首要目的是证明汉语翻转结构并非已有普遍语法原则与理论的真正反例。在放弃固有的模式的“一个动词”分析法后，我们提出“两个动词”分析法，将翻转A式结构中的谓语动词视为常规及物动词，而将翻转B式结构中的谓语动词分析为不及物性系动词，类似于英语中的measure、cost及weigh,本质上具有非宾格性质。据此假设，翻转A、B对应句式之间的所有重要的语义与句法差异均可得到合理解释。作为典型的及物动词，翻转A式的动词带有施事外论元与客体（受事/处所）内论元；用以表示行为动作，接受施事倾向性修饰语，允许被动化。相形之下，由于翻转B式的动词的系动词与非宾格属性，以动词之前的客体（受事/处所）名词成分为内论元，而以动词之后的名词成分为谓词性补足语；用以表示状态，不接受施事倾向性修饰语，也不可被动化。 有关翻转A、B对应句式之间存在派生关系的传统假设无论从理论方面，还是经验方面考虑都应该摒弃。关键之处在于其所设想的主语论元移入动词后的宾语位置以及宾语论元移入动词前的主语位置的句法操作均缺乏动因而无法操作。 本文在一个基于Chomsky句法语段理论的解释新方案中为翻转A、B句式的句法生成提出了不同的生成模式。具体来说，在翻转A式中，及物动词与其名词论元补足语合并成VP。该VP结构然后作为补足语与一个强力的抽象及物性轻动词v合并，并且将动词吸引上来附加，再与施事论元合并构成vP。接下来，vP与时态中心语T合并，施事论元与T（隐性地）形成一致并提升移位到主语Spec-TP位置。在翻转B式中，不及物性系动词首先与谓词性名词补足语合并，然后与内论元标志语合并构成VP。该VP与一个无外论元的不及物性轻动词v合并，强力词缀性轻动词v吸引动词的附加，形成vP。与T合并后，T充当探头，VP内的名词论元因其未赋值格特征而具有活性从而被确定为目标。T与论元（隐性地）形成一致，赋予其（隐性的）主格，并吸引其移位到主语Spec-TP位置。根据这一分析，翻转B式句中动词之后的名词成分作为动词的谓词性补足语，免受名词论元所受到的格要求。
[Abstract]:This study focuses on the inversion structure in Chinese, that is, "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted A") and "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted B") and so on.
Some previous studies have suggested that there is a derivative relationship between inversion A and inversion B. In both cases, the nominal element before the verb is the subject and the noun element after the verb is the object. Therefore, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted B-sentence can be derived from the inverted A-sentence; on the contrary, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted A-sentence can be derived from the inverted B-sentence. The reversal structure poses a serious challenge to many universal grammatical principles and theories, including thematic theory, case theory and constraint theory.
The primary purpose of this paper is to prove that the Chinese reversal structure is not a real counterexample of the existing universal grammar principles and theories. After abandoning the "one verb" analysis method of the inherent pattern, we propose the "two verbs" analysis method, which regards the predicate verbs in the reversal A structure as the conventional transitive verbs and the predicate in the reversal B structure as the normal transitive verbs. Verb analysis is an intransitive verb, similar to measure, cost and weight in English, which is essentially unaccusative. It is assumed that all the important semantic and syntactic differences between the corresponding sentences of inversion A and B can be reasonably explained. In contrast, the object (subject/place) noun element before the verb is used as the internal argument, and the noun element after the verb is used as the predicate complement because of the reversal of the binomial and unaccusative attributes of the verb of type B. State, not accepting agent oriented modifiers, nor passive.
The traditional hypothesis that there is a derivative relationship between the inverted A and the corresponding B sentence pattern should be abandoned both theoretically and experimentally. The key point is that the syntactic operation of the object position after the subject argument moves into the verb and the subject position before the object argument moves into the verb is inactive and therefore can not be operated.
In a new scheme of interpretation based on Chomsky's syntactic segmental theory, this paper proposes different patterns for the syntactic generation of inverted A and B sentences. Specifically, in inverted A, the transitive verb and its nominal argument complement are combined into VP. The VP structure is then combined as a complement with a strong Abstract transitive light verb v, and Then, the agent argument and T (implicitly) form the same and move to the subject Spec-TP position. In the inverted B form, the intransitive verb first merges with the predicate noun complement, and then merges with the inner argument marker to form VP. The VP merges with an intransitive light verb V without an external argument, and the strong affix light verb V attracts the addition of the verb, forming a probe into the combination of vP. and T. The nominal argument in the VP is identified as the target because of its unassigned case characteristics. T is consistent with the argument (implicitly), endows it with (implicitly) the nominative and attracts it. According to this analysis, the noun element after the verb in the B-sentence is inverted as the predicative complement of the verb, which avoids the case requirement of the noun argument.
【学位授予单位】：广东外语外贸大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：H146
本文编号：2250272
[Abstract]:This study focuses on the inversion structure in Chinese, that is, "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted A") and "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted B") and so on.
Some previous studies have suggested that there is a derivative relationship between inversion A and inversion B. In both cases, the nominal element before the verb is the subject and the noun element after the verb is the object. Therefore, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted B-sentence can be derived from the inverted A-sentence; on the contrary, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted A-sentence can be derived from the inverted B-sentence. The reversal structure poses a serious challenge to many universal grammatical principles and theories, including thematic theory, case theory and constraint theory.
The primary purpose of this paper is to prove that the Chinese reversal structure is not a real counterexample of the existing universal grammar principles and theories. After abandoning the "one verb" analysis method of the inherent pattern, we propose the "two verbs" analysis method, which regards the predicate verbs in the reversal A structure as the conventional transitive verbs and the predicate in the reversal B structure as the normal transitive verbs. Verb analysis is an intransitive verb, similar to measure, cost and weight in English, which is essentially unaccusative. It is assumed that all the important semantic and syntactic differences between the corresponding sentences of inversion A and B can be reasonably explained. In contrast, the object (subject/place) noun element before the verb is used as the internal argument, and the noun element after the verb is used as the predicate complement because of the reversal of the binomial and unaccusative attributes of the verb of type B. State, not accepting agent oriented modifiers, nor passive.
The traditional hypothesis that there is a derivative relationship between the inverted A and the corresponding B sentence pattern should be abandoned both theoretically and experimentally. The key point is that the syntactic operation of the object position after the subject argument moves into the verb and the subject position before the object argument moves into the verb is inactive and therefore can not be operated.
In a new scheme of interpretation based on Chomsky's syntactic segmental theory, this paper proposes different patterns for the syntactic generation of inverted A and B sentences. Specifically, in inverted A, the transitive verb and its nominal argument complement are combined into VP. The VP structure is then combined as a complement with a strong Abstract transitive light verb v, and Then, the agent argument and T (implicitly) form the same and move to the subject Spec-TP position. In the inverted B form, the intransitive verb first merges with the predicate noun complement, and then merges with the inner argument marker to form VP. The VP merges with an intransitive light verb V without an external argument, and the strong affix light verb V attracts the addition of the verb, forming a probe into the combination of vP. and T. The nominal argument in the VP is identified as the target because of its unassigned case characteristics. T is consistent with the argument (implicitly), endows it with (implicitly) the nominative and attracts it. According to this analysis, the noun element after the verb in the B-sentence is inverted as the predicative complement of the verb, which avoids the case requirement of the noun argument.
【学位授予单位】：广东外语外贸大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：H146
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前4条
1 丁加勇;;容纳句的数量关系、句法特征及认知解释[J];汉语学报;2006年01期
2 鹿荣;;供用类可逆句式的认知语义表现[J];汉语学习;2012年02期
3 余祥越;黎金娥;;“人喝酒”与“酒喝人”——最简方案框架下的汉英动词句法差异比较[J];外语研究;2006年01期
4 陆俭明;;“句式语法”理论与汉语研究[J];中国语文;2004年05期
本文编号：2250272
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/2250272.html
