现代汉语“全都”类总括副词研究

发布时间：2018-06-13 19:20

本文选题：总括副词 + 都　；参考：《浙江大学》2013年博士论文

【摘要】：本文运用语义学、功能语言学、特别是认知语言学的的理论,讨论了现代汉语“全都”类总括副词的语义功能及其对句法带来的制约,考察了“全都”类总括副词在行知言三域的选择倾向性,找到了各个总括副词否定的不同形式并分析其产生的原因,描写了它们之间的同现与替换的规律,并探讨了同现的语用功能及替换前后语用效果的不同。另外,我们还特别讨论了三个“都”语义功能及语义关联方向的变化,并对它们语义功能对句法形式的选择与约束进行了解释。这样就补充了以往对这一类副词研究的不足,深化了对它们的认识。第一章绪论,主要介绍了选题缘由、研究范围、理论框架、研究的思路和方法、前人对现代汉语“全都”类总括副词的研究成果,并指出了这一领域研究的不足及我们的研究重点,最后对语料的来源进行了说明。第二章从纵向角度考察了三个“都”的语义功能的变化,指出在语义功能从加合性到极性允准到极性突显的变化过程中,语义关联方向也由左向关联到跨界关联最后直到右向关联,“都”的身份最终由范围副词变为语气副词。第三章讨论了其他四个总括副词“全”“统统”“一概”“一律”的语义功能对句法的促动作用。首先,语义功能的不同反映了人们总括事物时的不同的视角,不同的方式。“都”执行总括行为时很少主观方式的加入,具有较高的客观性；“全”语义功能突显了其量化对象的整体性,由于人们认知上的困难及必要性较低而使其使用频率较低；“统统”的语义功能是笼统式总括,由于其不精确而常常选择比较随意的口语,“一概”的语义功能是总括全体,隐匿个性,这样的语义功能反映了人们观察事物的不同视角,即采取由施事或说话人到受事(或除施事以外的其他语义角色)的视角,隐匿受事或其他语义角色个性,因此受事成为其主要量化对象,再加上总括副词左向约束的规律,使“一概”选择了受事(或除施事以外的其他语义角色)在前的有标记句式。除了结构之外,“一概”句的谓语VP的句法特点、语义特点以及量化对象的特点都受到“一概”的语义功能的制约。“一律”的语义功能是以总括全体为背景,突显个体某一方面的一致性。因为“一律”的语义特征有[范围][方式或状态]两个方面,[范围]是背景,是前提,主体的[方式或状态]是突显内容。这说明“一律”是总括副词这一范畴中的边缘成员。第四章采用行知言三域理论来考察这一组总括副词对概念域的选择倾向性(以句子为研究单位)。“都”对“知”与“言”没有贡献,并且有时有消极作用,更多地选择行域；“全”与“统统”也倾向于选择行域；“一概”更多选择行域与知域交叉的情况,或者选择言域。“一律”主要选择言域中的规定、指令等言域行为。第五章从量的角度讨论了这一组总括副词的否定规律,分析了每一个总括副词的量特征以及它们的否定形式,发现每一个总括副词都可以进行全称否定,只有“都”与“全”才能进行差等否定,那是因为只有“都”与“全”在语义上是离散性的,是非定量性的,而其他几个副词都是定量性的。第六章考察了这一组副词的同现与互换规律,从语用功能的角度分析了同现连用及互换前后产生的不同语用效果,并解释了不能互换的原因。第七章对全文考察的内容和得出的结论做了小结,并简要总结了本文的不足之处,以及总括副词以后值得进一步研究的课题。
[Abstract]:Based on the theory of semantics , functional linguistics , especially cognitive linguistics , this paper discusses the semantic functions of all " all " types of modern Chinese and their limitations on syntax .

The first chapter introduces the origin , the scope of research , the theoretical framework , the thinking and methods of the research , the research results of the former in the category of " all " in modern Chinese , and points out the deficiencies of the research in this field and our research emphasis , and finally explains the origin of the corpus .

The second chapter investigates the change of semantic functions of three " all " from the longitudinal angle , and points out that in the process of changing the semantic function from additive to polarity to the change of polarity , the semantic association direction is also linked to the cross - border from left to right .

The third chapter discusses the semantic functions of " all " and " uniform " of " all " and " all " of " all " . First of all , the differences of the semantic function reflect the different perspectives and different ways when people enclose things .
The " full " semantic function highlights the integrity of its quantified object , which makes its use less frequently due to the difficulty and necessity of people ' s cognition ;
In addition to the structure , the semantic features of the predicate VP of the word " all " have been restricted by the semantic functions of the whole and the other semantic roles . In addition to the structure , the semantic features of the predicate VP of the sentence are the background of the background , which is the precondition , and the subjective way or the state of the subject is the highlight . This means that " the uniform " is the edge member in the category of the general term .

In the fourth chapter , we use the three - domain theory to study the selection tendency of the concept domain ( the sentence is the research unit ) . " Both " have no contribution to the " knowledge " and " the word " , and sometimes have negative effects , and more select the row domain ;
The " whole " and " unification " also tend to select the row domain ;
Select the case where the row field crosses the known domain , or select a word domain . The " uniform " mainly selects the introduction domain behavior such as the rules and instructions in the introduction domain .

In the fifth chapter , we discuss the negative law of this group of subwords from the perspective of quantity , analyze the quantity characteristics of each general term and their negative forms , and find that each of the subwords can be totally negated , and only " all " and " all " can carry out the difference , etc . , because only " all " and " all " are semantic and non - quantitative , while others are quantitative .

In chapter 6 , the co - occurrence and exchange rules of this group are examined , and the different pragmatic effects produced before and after the use of the same are analyzed from the point of view of pragmatic functions , and the reasons why they cannot be interchanged are explained .

Chapter 7 summarizes the contents and conclusions of the full - text investigation and summarizes the shortcomings of this paper and the subject worthy of further study after the conclusion of the general term .
【学位授予单位】：浙江大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：H146

【参考文献】