查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Chinese Passives in Comparative Perspective=漢語被動句與比較語法 |
---|---|
作 者 | 黃正德; | 書刊名 | 清華學報 |
卷 期 | 29:4 1999.12[民88.12] |
頁 次 | 頁423-509 |
分類號 | 801.4 |
關鍵詞 | 被動化; 空運算元移位; 空代詞移位; 間接被動句; 逆意被動句; 參數理論; 漢語; 日語; Passivization; Null-operator movement; Pro-movement; Indirect passives; Adversative passives; Parametric theory; Chinese; Japanese; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 本文針對國語中的兩種初動句型提出分析,並且討論其對語法理論與句法類型理論的影響。本文認為,關於漢語被動句的形成,補語接續和詞組移位兩種機制都有所牽涉,這一點與傳統的看法大相逕庭。在「長被動句」中,「被」乃是表經驗的動詞,它選擇一個補語子句,並藉著空運算元移位將其轉換化為次級謂語。在「短被動句」中,「被」則為助動詞,以動詞組為補語,其空代詞賓語以名詞組移位的方式移到動詞組內部的主語位置。本文也將國語的被動句與其他語言的被動句加以比較,包括漢語中的兩個方言(臺灣閩南話和廣東話)、日語、韓語、英語與羅曼斯語言等,從而探討了若干重要的問題,如(a)「被動化」此一觀念的普遍性,(b)不同語言間差異的根源,以及(c)「間接被動」(含「所有格被動」和「逆意被動」兩種)的適切分析等。本文指出,就普通性而言,被動化的過程乃是將一個及物價語非及物化。然而,非及物化可藉由不同的方式達成,如將外在論元加以抑制,或把某個內在論元加以「語意轉型」,藉之將整個充作論元的補語子句轉化成次級謂語,等等。特別重要的是,間接被動式的存在證明格位吸收並非被動化普遍定義的一部份。至於間接被動句,本文的分析認為它其實包含了一個內在的複雜謂語。此複雜謂語可以有個外在賓語(所有格被動句中為「外賓語」,逆意被動句中則為「最外賓語」),經過向上移位,就形成了間接被動句。最後本文提出,不同語言間在被動化現象方面種種的差異,可歸因於「觸發」被動化的語法成份。此觸發成份在不同語言中可以是動詞、助動詞、附著詞、或詞綴,因而具有「強度」不同的語法功。此一看法與當今參數理論的論點相一致,即不同語言間複雜的句法差異乃是由有限的辭彙差異所造成。漢語被動句基本上基於動詞、助動詞的類別,因而在語言類型學上具有重要的類型意義。 |
英文摘要 | This paper provides a detailed analysis of two types of mandarin Chinese passives, and discusses their implications for linguistic theory and syntactic typology. In contrast to traditional opposing views, we defend an analysis of Chinese passives that crucially postulates both complementation and movement. The long passive involves an experiential verb taking a clausal complement which turns itself into a secondary predicate, whereas the short passive involves an experiential auxiliary taking a VP complement which undergoes internal NP-movement. We then compare Mandarin passives to passives in other languages, including two Chinese dialects (Taiwanese Min and Cantonese), Japanese, Korean, English and Romance, and are led to several broader questions, including (a)the universality of the notion 'passive', (b)bources of cross-linguistic variations, and (c)the proper analysis of 'indirect passiver' (both the 'possessive passives' and the 'adversative passives'), etc. It is shown that, universally, passivization intransitivizes transitive predicates, but intransitivization may take the form of suppressing the external argument, or of type-shifting an internal argument into a secondary predicate. Furthermore, given the existence of indirect passives, case absorption is not a universal property of passivization. For the analysis of indirect passives, it is argued that they involve the passivizatio of complex predicates the take external objects (the 'outer object' for the possessive passive, and the 'outermost object' for the adversative passive. Finally, the range of cross-linguistic variations in passivization can be insightfully viewed as a function of the variation in the 'strengths' of the passivizing morpheme: whether it is a verb, an auxiliary, a clitic, or a suffix. These observations fit well current views of parametric theory, which attributes complicated syntactic differences to small lexical variations across languages. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。