“X死我了”构式及其相关研究

发布时间：2018-08-16 19:27

【摘要】：“X死我了”是口语中常见的结构,根据构式理论,它属于构式。本文包括绪论、主体和结论三个部分。绪论部分说明了选题的目的和意义,简述了国内外学者的研究现状,探究了以往研究存在的问题,介绍了研究的理论、方法和语料来源。第二章至第五章是本文的主题部分。第二章将“X”分为了形容词和动词两大类,并对其特征进行了分析:音节特征方面,单音节的“X”占绝对优势;语义特征方面,构式中的“X”大多蕴含消极意义;历时特征方面,“X死我了”构式真正具有构式义是出现在明代末年。同时,我们认为,“死”的程度义和“死”的隐喻有关。“了”表示事态已经出现了变化,且具有成句的功能。第三章包含了对“X死我了”与“我X死了”句法、语义、语用等方面的对比。句法方面:“我X死了”结构是典型的主谓式,而“X死我了”结构是动宾式,省略了主语;语义方面,“X死我了”与“我X死了”在语义指向和施受关系方面有差异;语用方面,“X死我了”与“我X死了”的语境适切度不一样,话题、述题、焦点和语体也不一样。随后我们用“元语增量”的理论解释了语用方面差异的原因。两个结构在使用频率,结构固定性方面也有差异。最后本章总结了差异产生的原因:“X”的性质和“我”的移位。第四章包含了对“X死我了”与“X死你了”句法、语义、语用等方面的对比。句法方面,两个结构的主语有差异;语义方面,两个结构的施受关系不同;语用方面,话题和语气是我们考察差异的两个方面。最后,我们分析了这种主宾互易现象产生的原因:“(你)X死我了”是“(我)X死你了”通过移位形成的。第五章总结了“X死我了”构式的产生机制与动因。“我X死了”转换成了“X死我了”,深层原因是“因果糅合”。此外,“转指理论”和“回溯理论”也可以用来解释“X死我了”构式的形成。在探究“X死我了”构式产生的动因时,我们运用了“语言的经济性原则”和冯胜利的“轻动词理论”。第六章概括了本文的观点,提出了不足之处。本文通过多层对比,会将“X死我了”构式的研究引入更深的层次,为后来学者的研究做出参考。
[Abstract]:X is a common structure in spoken language. According to the theory of construction, it belongs to construction. This paper includes three parts: introduction, subject and conclusion. The introduction explains the purpose and significance of the topic, briefly describes the current research situation of scholars at home and abroad, probes into the problems existing in previous studies, and introduces the theory, method and source of the research. The second to fifth chapters are the main part of this paper. In the second chapter, "X" is divided into adjectives and verbs, and its characteristics are analyzed: in the aspect of syllable, "X" of monosyllabic is dominant, and in semantic feature, "X" in construction contains negative meaning. In terms of diachronic features, the construction of "X died me" really had the meaning of construction in the late Ming Dynasty. At the same time, we think that the degree of death is related to the metaphor of death. "has" indicates that the situation has changed, and has the function of sentence. The third chapter contains a comparison of syntax, semantics, pragmatics and so on between "X is dead" and "I X is dead". Syntactic aspect: "I X is dead" is a typical subject-predicate, while "X is dead" structure is verb-object, omitting subject, in semantic aspect, "X is dead" and "I X is dead" are different in semantic direction and giving receiving relation. Pragmatically, the contextual relevance of "X is dead" and "I X is dead" is different, and the topic, focus and style are also different. Then we explain the reasons of pragmatic differences with the theory of meta-increment. There are also differences in frequency and structural stability between the two structures. Finally, this chapter summarizes the causes of the difference: the nature of "X" and the shift of "I". The fourth chapter contains a comparison of syntax, semantics, pragmatics and so on. In syntax, the subject of the two structures is different; in the semantic aspect, the relationship between the two structures is different; in the pragmatic aspect, the topic and the mood are the two aspects of the difference. Finally, we analyze the causes of this phenomenon: "(you) X died me" yes "(me) X died you" through the formation of displacement. The fifth chapter summarizes the formation mechanism and motivation of X death me. "I X died" converted to "X died me", the underlying cause is "causal blending." In addition, the transfer theory and the backtracking theory can also be used to explain the formation of X dead me. In exploring the causes of the formation of the "X death me" construction, we apply the "economic principle of language" and Feng Shengli's "light verb theory". The sixth chapter summarizes the views of this paper and puts forward the shortcomings. Through multi-layer comparison, the study of "X dead me" construction will be introduced to a deeper level, which can be used as a reference for the later scholars.
【学位授予单位】：上海外国语大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：H146.3

【参考文献】