汉语主语控制结构与主语提升结构句法生成机制的神经语言学研究

发布时间：2018-04-23 18:32

本文选题：控制结构 + 提升结构　；参考：《江苏师范大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：主语控制结构与主语提升结构的句法生成机制是否相同，理论语言学界有两种不同的观点。一种观点认为主语提升结构与主语控制结构的生成机制不同，主语提升结构为句法移位结构，其从句主语为移位生成的空语类NP语迹；主语控制结构不是句法移位结构，其从句主语为基础生成的空语类PRO，而另一种观点却认为主语控制结构的生成机制与主语提升结构类似，为句法移位结构，其从句主语的空位也应分析为由移位生成的空语类NP语迹。本文在转换生成语法的理论框架下，采用事件相关电位技术，使用句子理解任务，考察了主语控制结构、主语提升结构与“开始”类结构的句法生成机制，从而探讨汉语主语控制结构是否为句法移位结构，汉语主语控制结构与汉语主语提升结构的生成机制是否相同，，“开始”类动词为控制动词还是提升动词，并结合实验结果验证相关句法解析假设（Syntactic Parsing Hypotheses），希望能为解决理论语言学研究中存在的一些争议提供来自神经语言学上的证据支持。本文根据实验结果结合理论分析得出的主要结论如下：（1）汉语主语控制结构不是句法移位结构，其生成过程不涉及句法移位加工。Hornstein控制的移位理论（Movement Theory of Control, MTC）中对强制控制中的空语类PRO等同于NP语迹的观点似乎并不适用于汉语。可能受句子结构复杂度的影响，汉语主语提升结构是否为句法移位结构不确定。（2）“开始”类句子是句法移位结构，包含句法移位操作。“开始”类动词不向其主句主语指派题元角色，相较于控制动词，“开始”类动词与提升动词更相似。（3）空语类在主语控制结构与主语提升结构中是否存在心理现实性还不明确。可能是因为本研究所选择的实验语料结构不够复杂所致。（4）“开始”类句子的句法神经加工机制部分支持了“语迹再激活假设”的句法解析机制，本实验结果与“直接关联假设”、“题元修正假设”的观点不一致。
[Abstract]:There are two different views in theoretical linguistics whether the syntactic generation mechanism of subject-controlled structure and subject-elevating structure is the same or not. One point of view is that the subject lifting structure is different from the subject control structure in generating mechanism. The subject lifting structure is syntactic shift structure, and its clause subject is empty NP-like trace generated by shift, and the subject control structure is not syntactic shift structure. In the other view, the mechanism of subject control structure is similar to that of subject lifting structure, which is syntactic shift structure. The empty position of its clause subject should also be analyzed as the NP trace of empty language generated by shift. In this paper, under the theoretical framework of transformational generative grammar, using event-related potential technique and sentence comprehension task, we investigate the syntactic generation mechanism of subject control structure, subject promotion structure and "start" class structure. Therefore, this paper discusses whether the control structure of Chinese subject is syntactic shift structure, whether the generating mechanism of Chinese subject control structure is the same as that of Chinese subject promotion structure, and whether the "start" verb is a control verb or a lifting verb. Combined with the experimental results, this paper verifies the syntactic parse hypothesis of Syntactic Parsing hypotheses, and hopes to provide some evidences from neurolinguistics for solving some disputes in theoretical linguistics. Based on the experimental results and theoretical analysis, the main conclusions are as follows: (1) Chinese subject control structure is not syntactic shift structure, and its generating process does not involve the theory of shift Theory of control controlled by Hornstein. The viewpoint that the empty class PRO in compulsory control is equivalent to NP trace does not seem to be suitable for Chinese. Under the influence of sentence structure complexity, it is uncertain whether the Chinese subject lifting structure is syntactic shift structure. Start sentences are syntactic shift structures that contain syntactic shift operations. The "start" verb does not assign the role of the subject to its subject, but is more similar to the ascending verb than the control verb. 3) it is not clear whether there is psychological reality in the subject control structure and the subject promotion structure. This may be due to the fact that the experimental corpus selected by this study is not complex enough. 4) the syntactic neuroprocessing mechanism of "start" sentences partly supports the syntactic parsing mechanism of "trace reactivation hypothesis". The results of this experiment are inconsistent with those of "direct correlation hypothesis" and "topic revision hypothesis".
【学位授予单位】：江苏师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H146.3

【参考文献】