“本来”和“原来”的多角度考察及其偏误分析
发布时间：2018-12-06 17:57
【摘要】：本文分别从语义、句法和语用三个平面对“本来”和“原来”进行了全面系统地考察。既描写了它们的个性特征,也对比了它们的相似之处。在本体研究的基础上,我们还描写了留学生习得这对近义词时所出现的偏误类型,并分析导致偏误的原因。 包括绪论和结语在内,全文一共分为六个部分。 绪论：介绍了本文的研究意义,总结了已有的相关研究成果,并交代了本文的语料来源及采用的研究方法。 第一章：从语义角度考察“本来”和“原来”。首先从语义特征的角度分别分析了作定语的“本来”和“原来”,通过比较,发现两个词在语义特征上存在差异。作定语的“本来”具有[+内指性],[+连续性],[+表时性]的隐性语义特征,而作定语的“原来”则只有[+表时性]的隐性语义特征。最后分析了“本来副”和“原来副”的语义背景。我们把副词“本来”按义项分为“本来副1”、“本来副2”和“本来副3”,对它们的语义背景逐个进行分析。对于“原来副”,我们探寻出它在实际语用中的完整式和简约式。尽管“本来副,”和“原来名”的语义相似,但它们在以下三方面存在语义差异：事物前后有无变化,时问跨度长短,语义侧重点。 第二章：系统考察了“本来”和“原来”的句法结构。首先归纳了作定语的“本来”和“原来”的中心语类型,发现它们与中心语的匹配能力存在差异,“本来”的中心语绝大多数是抽象名词,而“原来”所能修饰的中心语呈多样化。对于“本来副”,我们还是分义项逐个对它的句法特征进行了全面的描写。对于“原来副”,我们分别从它与其它类副词的共现,它与语气副词的共现两个方面去描述“原来”的句法特征,发现副词“原来”在语序上优于绝大部分的其它类副词和语气副词。最后还描述了作状语的“本来副1”与“原来名”的句法差异。 第三章：探讨了副词“本来”和“原来”的语用及篇章功能,我们认为在语用上,它们都具有强调突出和指明预设的功能。在篇章连接上,它们都有解说释义和间隔反复的衔接功能。 第四章：通过对外国留学生进行问卷调查及搜索HSK动态语料库,统计出留学生在“本来”和“原来”上的偏误率,我们发现,留学生在语序方面的偏误率相对较低,但是由于他们对两个词的义项及句法特征把握不清而出现的偏误相对较多。我们对所掌握的语料进行了归纳,总结出三类偏误类型：误用,错序及遗漏,并对引起偏误的原因进行了简要分析。 结语：对全文的主要结论做了回顾和总结。
[Abstract]:This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic study of "original" and "original" from three aspects of semantics, syntax and pragmatics. They describe both their personality characteristics and their similarities. On the basis of ontological study, we also describe the types of errors that occur in the acquisition of the synonyms by foreign students, and analyze the causes of the errors. Including the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into six parts. Introduction: this paper introduces the significance of the research, summarizes the existing research results, and describes the source of the corpus and the research methods adopted in this paper. Chapter one: from the semantic point of view, "original" and "original". First of all, this paper analyzes the "original" and "original" of attributive words from the point of view of semantic features, and finds that there are differences in semantic features between the two words by comparison. The attributive "original" has the implicit semantic features of "implicity", "continuity" and "chronicity", while the attributive "original" has only the implicit semantic characteristics of "tabular temporal". Finally, it analyzes the semantic background of "original accessory" and "original accessory". We divide the adverbs "original" into "original accessory 1", "original accessory 2" and "original accessory 3" according to their meanings, and analyze their semantic background one by one. With regard to "original accessory", we explore its complete and minimalist forms in practical pragmatics. Although the semantics of "original accessory," and "original name" are similar, they have semantic differences in the following three aspects: whether things change before and after, the length of time span, and the semantic focus. Chapter two: the syntactic structure of "original" and "original" are systematically investigated. Firstly, the author summarizes the types of "original" and "original" as attributive words, and finds that there are differences in their matching ability with the central language. Most of the "original" central words are abstract nouns. The "original" can be modified by a variety of central words. For the original accessory, we describe its syntactic features one by one. For "original adverb", we describe the syntactic characteristics of "original" from its co-occurrence with other adverbs and the co-occurrence of modal adverbs. It is found that the adverb "original" is superior to most other kinds of adverbs and mood adverbs in word order. In the end, the syntactic differences between the adverbial "original adverbial 1" and "original name" are described. The third chapter discusses the pragmatic and textual functions of adverbs "original" and "original". We think that they all have the functions of highlighting and indicating presupposition in pragmatics. In the connection of the text, they all have the function of explaining the meaning and interlocking repeatedly. Chapter four: through the questionnaire survey to the foreign students and searching the HSK dynamic corpus, we find that the error rate of the foreign students in the word order is relatively low, and the error rate of the foreign students in the "original" and the "original" is found to be relatively low. However, because they do not understand the meanings and syntactic features of the two words, there are relatively many errors. We sum up three types of errors: misuse, order and omission, and briefly analyze the causes of errors. Conclusion: the main conclusions of the paper are reviewed and summarized.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H195
本文编号：2366428
[Abstract]:This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic study of "original" and "original" from three aspects of semantics, syntax and pragmatics. They describe both their personality characteristics and their similarities. On the basis of ontological study, we also describe the types of errors that occur in the acquisition of the synonyms by foreign students, and analyze the causes of the errors. Including the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into six parts. Introduction: this paper introduces the significance of the research, summarizes the existing research results, and describes the source of the corpus and the research methods adopted in this paper. Chapter one: from the semantic point of view, "original" and "original". First of all, this paper analyzes the "original" and "original" of attributive words from the point of view of semantic features, and finds that there are differences in semantic features between the two words by comparison. The attributive "original" has the implicit semantic features of "implicity", "continuity" and "chronicity", while the attributive "original" has only the implicit semantic characteristics of "tabular temporal". Finally, it analyzes the semantic background of "original accessory" and "original accessory". We divide the adverbs "original" into "original accessory 1", "original accessory 2" and "original accessory 3" according to their meanings, and analyze their semantic background one by one. With regard to "original accessory", we explore its complete and minimalist forms in practical pragmatics. Although the semantics of "original accessory," and "original name" are similar, they have semantic differences in the following three aspects: whether things change before and after, the length of time span, and the semantic focus. Chapter two: the syntactic structure of "original" and "original" are systematically investigated. Firstly, the author summarizes the types of "original" and "original" as attributive words, and finds that there are differences in their matching ability with the central language. Most of the "original" central words are abstract nouns. The "original" can be modified by a variety of central words. For the original accessory, we describe its syntactic features one by one. For "original adverb", we describe the syntactic characteristics of "original" from its co-occurrence with other adverbs and the co-occurrence of modal adverbs. It is found that the adverb "original" is superior to most other kinds of adverbs and mood adverbs in word order. In the end, the syntactic differences between the adverbial "original adverbial 1" and "original name" are described. The third chapter discusses the pragmatic and textual functions of adverbs "original" and "original". We think that they all have the functions of highlighting and indicating presupposition in pragmatics. In the connection of the text, they all have the function of explaining the meaning and interlocking repeatedly. Chapter four: through the questionnaire survey to the foreign students and searching the HSK dynamic corpus, we find that the error rate of the foreign students in the word order is relatively low, and the error rate of the foreign students in the "original" and the "original" is found to be relatively low. However, because they do not understand the meanings and syntactic features of the two words, there are relatively many errors. We sum up three types of errors: misuse, order and omission, and briefly analyze the causes of errors. Conclusion: the main conclusions of the paper are reviewed and summarized.
【学位授予单位】：华中师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H195
【引证文献】
相关硕士学位论文 前2条
1 邵演艳;“原来”与“本来”的多角度辨析[D];上海师范大学;2013年
2 宋美花;汉韩确信类语气副词对比研究[D];延边大学;2013年
，本文编号：2366428
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/hanyulw/2366428.html
