發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-01-19 07:18

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu) 語料庫(kù) 論元結(jié)構(gòu) 類指 定指　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2014年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)是一種既常見又特殊的具有跨語言特性的語言現(xiàn)象。中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)在句法上為主動(dòng)式而在語義上又隱含著被動(dòng)的意義。該結(jié)構(gòu)特殊的語法形式、語義屬性以及復(fù)雜的二元對(duì)立特征①,已成為國(guó)內(nèi)外語言學(xué)界研究的熱點(diǎn)和爭(zhēng)議的話題。以往對(duì)該結(jié)構(gòu)研究的焦點(diǎn)主要集中在中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的生成機(jī)制、副詞的使用以及時(shí)體的限制等方面。然而,在中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的界定上仍沒有統(tǒng)一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),學(xué)界從不同的視角衍生出不同的制約標(biāo)準(zhǔn),如副詞效應(yīng)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、隱含施事標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、情態(tài)語義標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、動(dòng)詞體貌制約標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、主語有責(zé)條件、動(dòng)詞影響標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及論元敏感制約標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等諸多紛繁復(fù)雜的制約標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而且每一種制約標(biāo)準(zhǔn)都能找出違反該標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的反例。為了去繁就簡(jiǎn),突破藩籬,以加深對(duì)中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)本質(zhì)的認(rèn)識(shí),本文從語言類型學(xué)的跨語言視角,在總結(jié)和借鑒了國(guó)內(nèi)外對(duì)中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)研究成果的基礎(chǔ)上,著眼于對(duì)漢英兩種語言結(jié)構(gòu)的語義特征、施事論元的隱含動(dòng)因、中動(dòng)主語的內(nèi)在屬性等進(jìn)行整體的全方位的分析和研究。 為了避免在跨語言研究中比附英語、生搬硬套、止于直覺的表觀和片面,本文以語料庫(kù)語言事實(shí)的統(tǒng)計(jì)為依據(jù),以漢語為本位以英語為參照,排斥主觀臆斷,以“他山之石,可以攻玉”的理念,參照外位,來充實(shí)本位,本文對(duì)英漢語料庫(kù)真實(shí)語料的調(diào)查、統(tǒng)計(jì)進(jìn)行了定量、定性對(duì)比分析,對(duì)前人的假說進(jìn)行了求證,證實(shí)了“中動(dòng)具有跨語言特性”的論點(diǎn)。解決了英漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)統(tǒng)一的語義特征②以及其定義特征和本質(zhì)特征的界定問題,明確了研究對(duì)象和范圍；進(jìn)而論證了和確立了漢語中[NP+V-起來+AP]和[NP+好-V]構(gòu)式的中動(dòng)地位。通過對(duì)比研究,發(fā)現(xiàn)了英漢兩種語言的中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)方面所具有的共性和差異：都是介于主動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)與被動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)之間的獨(dú)立語言構(gòu)式；都具有“主語有責(zé)性”特征③和非事件性特征④；都有凸顯受事隱含施事等特征。從語料庫(kù)的分布情況和使用范圍看,英、漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)都屬于口頭語言、中動(dòng)動(dòng)詞多數(shù)是日常用語中單音節(jié)常用動(dòng)詞；在實(shí)際語料中,不只副詞／形容詞能用于中動(dòng)詞后,介詞短語也能用于中動(dòng)詞后來表述主語名詞的屬性或特征,而且副詞／形容詞或介詞短語的語義指向都不指向隱含的施事等。不同之處：英語動(dòng)詞后多用副詞修飾而漢語中動(dòng)詞后多用形容詞修飾；語料中發(fā)現(xiàn)英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)存在大量光桿動(dòng)詞結(jié)構(gòu)而漢語中沒有；在構(gòu)句條件允準(zhǔn)程度方面,漢語比英語寬容度強(qiáng)、能產(chǎn)性高。 論文不但從組合關(guān)系入手,在句法結(jié)構(gòu)上將其分為典型的和非典型的兩種類型,研究其句法結(jié)構(gòu)和語義表達(dá)。文章還從認(rèn)知的視角,對(duì)中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行動(dòng)態(tài)研究,從聚合關(guān)系入手,提出了在同一句法位置上的對(duì)立歸一系統(tǒng)中存在“類指”與“定指”兩種類型的中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)。不但論證了英、漢兩種語言在中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的類指與定指上具有的共性,考察了與之對(duì)應(yīng)的語義變化、語用差異以及在隱含施事方面的深層機(jī)理,還對(duì)國(guó)內(nèi)外普遍認(rèn)為的所有中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)都具有類屬性和普遍性特征的論點(diǎn)提出了自己的不同觀點(diǎn)。通過研究發(fā)現(xiàn)“定指”中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)表述在特定語境下,具象的(實(shí)體的)客體主語在動(dòng)作過程中的屬性或狀態(tài)。指出了只有“類指”中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)才有類屬性、規(guī)律性和普遍性的特征。論證了兩種語言在“定指”和“類指”中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)對(duì)比分析中有著如下相同的差異：隱含施事認(rèn)知?jiǎng)右虻牟町悺⒚~主語語義屬性的差異以及語義等級(jí)層級(jí)的差異。用類指和定指中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)以及其物性結(jié)構(gòu),對(duì)困擾學(xué)界的一些違反界定中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的反例進(jìn)行了統(tǒng)一解釋。 全文共分六個(gè)部分。 第一章作為緒論首先是問題的提出,介紹了研究的對(duì)象和內(nèi)容、研究的目的及意義。該章同時(shí)作為文獻(xiàn)綜述部分,回顧并介紹了國(guó)內(nèi)外不同流派對(duì)英、漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的相關(guān)研究；評(píng)述了英、漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的研究以及比較研究中所取得的成就及存在的問題。然后提出了指導(dǎo)理論和研究方法,簡(jiǎn)介了自建雙語語料庫(kù)、美國(guó)當(dāng)代英語語料庫(kù)以及北京大學(xué)現(xiàn)代漢語語料庫(kù)的情況,最后介紹了語料的來源和結(jié)構(gòu)安排。 第二章英、漢中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的語料考察和研究。首先,介紹了自建雙語語料庫(kù)的建設(shè)情況。其次,在通用大型語料庫(kù)和自建英、漢雙語平行語料庫(kù)的支持下,本文作者對(duì)語料庫(kù)的真實(shí)語料進(jìn)行定量分析,給出定性結(jié)論。然后,文章統(tǒng)計(jì)分析了中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)在不同語料庫(kù)中的分布情況,以查證該結(jié)構(gòu)的使用范圍和頻次。對(duì)英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)所對(duì)應(yīng)的漢語結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行了統(tǒng)計(jì)分析和研究,對(duì)滿足中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)構(gòu)句條件的動(dòng)詞以及修飾語進(jìn)行語料考察、統(tǒng)計(jì)和分析,以查證該結(jié)構(gòu)的漢語結(jié)構(gòu)有哪些?最后,采用定性與定量分析相結(jié)合、描寫與分析相結(jié)合的研究方法,論證語料中哪些動(dòng)詞和副詞能用于英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)也能/不能與漢語對(duì)應(yīng)?以及它們使用頻次的異同。分別對(duì)漢英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的約束條件和中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)修飾語的類別以及選擇制約進(jìn)行了對(duì)比研究。本章的目的是通過呈現(xiàn)在真實(shí)語料方面英漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的一些獨(dú)特特征,分別為第三章的中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的界定和第五章的漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)研究提供依據(jù)。 第三章中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的界定。本章以第二章的語料統(tǒng)計(jì)分析的結(jié)果為依據(jù),以論元結(jié)構(gòu)理論和認(rèn)知語言學(xué)理論為指導(dǎo),在前賢們研究成果的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行明確界定,有利于把握該結(jié)構(gòu)的全貌。同時(shí),根據(jù)英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),結(jié)合在語料庫(kù)中與英語對(duì)應(yīng)的漢語結(jié)構(gòu)特征,論證和確立了漢語中[NP+V-起來+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的中動(dòng)地位。 第四章對(duì)中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行了句法和語義分類。本章從組合關(guān)系上,將中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)分成典型的和非典型的進(jìn)行研究。還從聚合關(guān)系上提出了中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)存在“類指”與“定指”兩種類型。論證了英漢兩種語言在中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的類指與定指上具有的共性和差異,考察了與之對(duì)應(yīng)的語義變化、語用差異以及在隱含施事方面的深層機(jī)理。 第五章是對(duì)漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)及其語義特征的研究。結(jié)合第二章的語料分析,本章對(duì)漢語結(jié)構(gòu)“V-起來”與“好-V”的句法和語義特征進(jìn)行了研究。借鑒英語中動(dòng)研究中已經(jīng)達(dá)成共識(shí)的中動(dòng)句法標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和中動(dòng)語義特征,檢驗(yàn)漢語非施事主語V-起來句[NP+V-起來+AP](簡(jiǎn)稱S1)和非施事主語“好-V”句[NP+好-V](簡(jiǎn)稱S2),發(fā)現(xiàn)這兩種句法結(jié)構(gòu)都體現(xiàn)了英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的所有中動(dòng)語義特征和非常相似的句法表征。據(jù)此,本文在第三章中確立過的這兩種漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行構(gòu)句成分分析和結(jié)構(gòu)層次分析,并從句法特征和語義特征上發(fā)現(xiàn)了它們的異同。對(duì)句首名詞NP的語義屬性、謂語動(dòng)詞V的選擇限制、以及修飾語AP的語義指向進(jìn)行全面系統(tǒng)的分析。 第六部分是全文的結(jié)語。首先概括了本文研究對(duì)比的結(jié)果和理論思考,然后闡明本研究的貢獻(xiàn)和應(yīng)用啟示,最后說明有待努力之處。 本論文基本的研究方法是基于自建英漢語雙語平行語料庫(kù)和通用語料庫(kù)的真實(shí)語料,進(jìn)行定量統(tǒng)計(jì)與定性分析相結(jié)合、描寫與分析相結(jié)合的方法�！岸俊卑ㄓ⒄Z和中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)在語料庫(kù)中存在形式的分布情況、出現(xiàn)頻次的定量統(tǒng)計(jì)和分析,以及與其對(duì)應(yīng)的漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)在語料庫(kù)中存在形式的分布情況、出現(xiàn)頻次的定量統(tǒng)計(jì)和分析。“定性”包括英漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的對(duì)應(yīng)情況的共性和差異的分析,英漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)語義特征的共性與差異的分析。同時(shí)“描寫”是定量的基礎(chǔ),“分析”是定性的必由之路,通過內(nèi)省的方法來彌補(bǔ)語料庫(kù)統(tǒng)計(jì)中的不足。 本研究的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)主要體現(xiàn)在以下幾個(gè)方面： 1)以語料庫(kù)的真實(shí)語言統(tǒng)計(jì)為依據(jù),以語言類型學(xué)理論為指導(dǎo),解決了中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的定義特征和本質(zhì)特征的界定問題,明確了研究對(duì)象和范圍；根據(jù)通用語料庫(kù)和自建雙語語料庫(kù)的調(diào)查、統(tǒng)計(jì),論證了和確立了漢語中[NP+V-起來+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的“中動(dòng)”地位。 2)在大量語料的支持下,對(duì)英、漢語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的特征進(jìn)行定量、定性分析,對(duì)前人的假說進(jìn)行求證,證實(shí)了“中動(dòng)具有跨語言特性”的論點(diǎn),以期深化漢語言所具有的共性和差異的本體研究。 3)從聚合關(guān)系入手,提出了中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的“類指”與“定指”兩種類型,不但論證了英、漢兩種語言在中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的類指與定指上具有的共性和差異,還分析了與之對(duì)應(yīng)的語義變化、語用差異以及在隱含施事方面的深層機(jī)理。就國(guó)內(nèi)外普遍認(rèn)為的所有“中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)都具有類屬性和普遍性特征”的論點(diǎn),本文作者以語料庫(kù)中檢測(cè)到的真實(shí)語料為依據(jù),從主語名詞在不同類型中的語義屬性和認(rèn)知?jiǎng)右蛏险撟C了該“類屬性”論點(diǎn)的偏頗。指出了只有“類指”中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)才有類屬性和普遍性的特征,“定指”的中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)并不表述這兩種遍性特征。論證了兩種語言在“定指”和“類指”中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)對(duì)比分析中有著如下相同的差異：隱含施事認(rèn)知?jiǎng)右虻牟町�、名詞主語語義屬性的差異以及語義等級(jí)層級(jí)的差異。 4)對(duì)困惑語言學(xué)界的復(fù)雜的二元對(duì)立特征和許多違反界定中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的反例進(jìn)行了統(tǒng)一解釋①,了解這些特征會(huì)有助于更加深刻地探討中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的本質(zhì)。 不足之處在于,在語料的統(tǒng)計(jì)方面,由于在刪減不符合構(gòu)句條件的句子時(shí)需要人工操作,可能出現(xiàn)部分?jǐn)?shù)據(jù)的偏差；自建英漢雙語語料庫(kù)規(guī)模小,達(dá)不到海量檢索,也可能會(huì)出現(xiàn)數(shù)據(jù)偏差。根據(jù)上述不足我們將多次核對(duì)、窮盡檢索,盡可能地減少偏差；對(duì)于自建雙語語料庫(kù),今后將聯(lián)合能聯(lián)合的力量盡可能擴(kuò)大其規(guī)模
[Abstract]:In the dynamic structure is a kind of common and special characteristics of cross language language phenomenon. In the dynamic structure in syntax is active in semantic and implied passive meaning. The special structure of the grammatical forms, semantic attributes and the complexity of the two binary characters, has become a hot and controversial research in China inside and outside the linguistic topics. The previous focus on the structure of the main structure of the concentrated dynamic mechanism in the use of adverbial and the restriction and so on. However, in the dynamic structure definition there is no uniform standard, the academic standards of different constraints derived from different perspectives, such as adverb effect standard, the implied agent standard, modal verbs semantic standards, control standard, subject has the responsibility condition, standard and effect of verb argument sensitive control standard constraints such as standard many, and each kind of restriction The standard can find counterexamples to violate the standard. In order to simplify, to break through barriers, to deepen the understanding of the structure of dynamic nature, this paper from the typological cross linguistic perspective, summarizes and draws lessons from the domestic and foreign research results on the basis of the dynamic structure, focusing on the semantic features of Chinese and English the structure of language, implicit motive agent argument, in the intrinsic properties of the subject were analyzed and studied entirely.
In order to avoid cross linguistic research in analogy in English, mechanically, ending in intuition of apparent and one-sided, based on the statistics of corpus linguistic facts as the basis for Chinese to English as the reference standard, exclusion of subjective, "outside the box, so the concept of reference, to enrich the standard, this paper surveys on English and Chinese corpus corpus, statistical quantitative, qualitative comparative analysis of the previous hypothesis of the verification, confirmed the" dynamic cross linguistic characteristics "argument. To solve the semantic features of dynamic unified structure in English and Chinese, and defines its definition and essential features, the research the object and scope; then discussed and established the dynamic status of Chinese [NP+V- +AP] and [NP+ -V] constructions. Through comparative study, found with two languages in the dynamic aspects of the structure And the differences are: independent language between active structure and passive structure; with "subject accountability" and the characteristics of specific non events; have highlighted patient characteristics. The implied agent from the corpus of the distribution and use of perspective, English, Chinese are verbal constructions in language, verbs are mostly monosyllabic verbs in everyday language; in the actual data, not only can be used in the adjective / adverb verb, can prepositional phrases used in verb noun later expression of attributes or features, and describe the semantic / adverbs or prepositional phrases to do not point to the implied agent. Different: English verbs more used adverbs and verbs after the more adjectives in the corpus; it is found that the dynamic structure of the existence of a large number of English verb structure but not in Chinese; in construction This condition sentence level, Chinese than English strong tolerance, high productivity.
The paper not only from the combination of two types of relationship, which is divided into typical and atypical syntactic structure will, expression of the syntactic structure and semantic. The article also from the perspective of cognition, the dynamic structure of dynamic research, starting from the paradigmatic relations, proposed in the same syntactic position on opposing normalization system in the presence of "means" and "fixed" two types of dynamic structure. Not only demonstrates the English, Chinese two kinds of language structure refers to the common and fixed finger is in the middle, examines the semantic change and the corresponding mechanism, pragmatic differences and deep in the implied agent, also think of all the animals in the domestic and foreign common structures have the attributes of the class and the general characteristics of the argument put forward different opinions. The study found that "definiteness" dynamic structure representation in the particular context, concrete (entity) in the subject object The attribute or state in the process. It is pointed out that only "refers to" dynamic structure have attributes, characteristics and universality. The argument of the two language in the "reference" and "refers to" a follows the same structural differences in Contrastive Analysis: the difference between the implied agent cognitive motivation the difference between noun semantic attributes and semantic difference between grade levels. In order to move in and refers to the structure and the physical structure of a class, the unified interpretation plagued the academia in violation of some standard definition in the dynamic structure of counterexamples.
The full text is divided into six parts.
The first chapter is the introduction of the problem, introduces the research object and content, the purpose and significance of the research. This chapter also as part of the literature review, the paper reviews the domestic and foreign related research on different genres of English, constructions in Chinese; review English, problem research and comparative study of structure the achievement and existing in Chinese. And then put forward the guiding theory and research method, introduces the construction of bilingual corpus, corpus of contemporary American English and modern Chinese corpus of Peking University, finally introduces the language material source and structure arrangement.
The second chapter, Hanzhoung construction corpus investigation and research. Firstly, this paper introduces the construction situation of building bilingual corpus. Secondly, in general large corpora and English Chinese bilingual self, parallel corpus, the author of the corpus corpus for quantitative analysis are given. Then, the article analyses the distribution in the dynamic structure in different corpus, to verify the use of the structure and frequency. On the dynamic structure of Chinese corresponding structure was analyzed and studied in English, to meet the dynamic structure of a sentence and the verb modifier of corpus investigation, statistics and analysis to verify the structure of Chinese the structure of what? At last, using a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis, descriptive research method combined with analysis, argumentation corpus which verbs and adverbs can be used for dynamic structure in English can also / Not with the Chinese counterpart? And their similarities and differences. The frequency of use of dynamic structure modifier categories and structure constraints and dynamic constraints in Chinese and English are studied. The purpose of this chapter is to present some unique features through the dynamic structure in the corpus aspect in English and Chinese, provide the basis for the dynamic structure study for the third chapter in the definition and structure of the fifth chapter in the Chinese language.
The third chapter defines the structure. The results of this chapter to the second chapter of the corpus analysis as the basis, the argument structure theory and the theory of cognitive linguistics, based on previous research results, the dynamic structure is clearly defined, is conducive to grasp the whole appearance of the structure. At the same time, according to the structure the definition of standard dynamic English, combined with Chinese and English corresponding structural features in the corpus, argumentation and established the dynamic status of Chinese [NP+V- +AP] and [NP+ -V] format.
The fourth chapter is the syntactic and semantic classification of the dynamic structure. This chapter from the association, the dynamic research structure is divided into typical and atypical. From the paradigmatic proposed the existence of "generic" and "fixed point" in two types of dynamic structure. Demonstrates the two languages structure the class refers to the fixed finger with the similarities and differences in the effects of semantic change, by contrast, pragmatic differences and deep mechanism in the aspects of the implied agent.
The fifth chapter is to study the structure and semantic features of Chinese. Combined with the second chapter analysis of the corpus, syntactic and semantic features of this chapter on the structure of Chinese "V-" and "-V" were studied. From the semantic features of English middle animal studies have reached a consensus in dynamic syntax and standard. The inspection of Chinese non agent subject V- [NP+V- +AP] up (S1) and non agent subject "-V" [NP+ -V] (S2), found that two kinds of syntactic structure reflects the semantic features of syntactic representation all constructions and very similar in English. Therefore, the two Chinese this paper has established in the third chapter the dynamic structure analysis of structure of sentence analysis and hierarchical structure, and from the syntactic and semantic features found their similarities and differences. The first sentence semantic attribute NOUN NP, restriction predicate verb V, and modified The semantic orientation of the language AP is analyzed in a comprehensive and systematic way.
The sixth part is the conclusion of the paper. First, we summarize the results and theoretical thinking of this study, then clarify the contributions and application implications of this research, and finally, explain what needs to be done.
In this paper, the basic research method is the authentic self English Chinese bilingual parallel corpus and corpus based, by quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis, the method of description and analysis. "Quantitative" includes distribution form of the dynamic structure in English and in the corpus, statistical and quantitative analysis of the frequency of emergence well, the corresponding dynamic structure in Chinese corpus in the distribution form of the emergence of statistical and quantitative analysis. The frequency of "qualitative" includes the analysis of similarities and differences between the corresponding structures in English and Chinese, analyzes the similarities and differences between English and Chinese middle construction the semantic features of "description" is at the same time. The basis of quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis is the only way which must be passed by the method of introspection, to make up the corpus statistics.
The innovation of this study is mainly reflected in the following aspects:
1) to real language corpus statistics according to linguistic typology theory, solves the dynamic problem of defining the definition and essential features of the structure, the research object and scope; according to the survey, the General Corpus and self bilingual corpus statistics, demonstrated and established in Chinese [NP+V- and +AP] [NP+ -V] format "dynamic" status.
2) with the support of a large number of corpus, we made quantitative and qualitative analysis of the characteristics of Chinese and English middle constructions, and verified the hypothesis of predecessors, which confirmed the argument that "middle movement has cross linguistic characteristics", in order to deepen the ontological research of similarities and differences between Chinese language and Chinese language.
3) starting from the paradigmatic relations, proposed in the dynamic structure of the "generic" and "fixed point" two types, not only demonstrates the English, Chinese two kinds of language structure and category refers to the fixed finger with the similarities and differences in the middle, also analyzes the semantic change and the pragmatic differences and the underlying mechanism in the implied agent aspects. All moving structures have the attributes of the class and the general characteristics of "argument at home and abroad generally think, the real corpus based on corpus detected as the basis, from the noun semantic attributes in different types of motivation and cognition on the demonstration of the" the class attribute argument. It is pointed out that only biased "refers to" dynamic structure is characteristic of class attribute and universality, "refers to the" middleconstruction do not express these two times characteristics. The argument of the two language in the "reference" and "category refers to the" dynamic structure of There are the same as differences than analysis: differences in the implied agent cognitive motivation, differences and differences in semantic attribute noun semantic class hierarchy.
4) a unified explanation of the complex two opposite characteristics and many counterexamples that define the standard of middle structure.
The disadvantage is that in the corpus statistics, because of the need for manual operation in the construction cut does not comply with the sentence, there may be deviation data; from the bilingual corpus is small, not up to the massive search, may also appear deviation. According to the above data deficiencies we will repeatedly check, exhaustive search, as to reduce the deviation; for building bilingual corpus, the future will joint the joint force as much as possible to expand its scale

【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：H314;H146

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 顧陽;論元結(jié)構(gòu)理論介紹[J];國(guó)外語言學(xué);1994年01期

2 張伯江;認(rèn)識(shí)觀的語法表現(xiàn)[J];國(guó)外語言學(xué);1997年02期

3 楊素英;從非賓格動(dòng)詞現(xiàn)象看語義與句法結(jié)構(gòu)之間的關(guān)系[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);1999年01期

4 石毓智;論漢語的結(jié)構(gòu)意義和詞匯標(biāo)記之關(guān)系——有定和無定范疇對(duì)漢語句法結(jié)構(gòu)的影響[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);2002年01期

5 袁毓林;句子的焦點(diǎn)結(jié)構(gòu)及其對(duì)語義解釋的影響[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);2003年04期

6 徐烈炯,沈陽;題元理論與漢語配價(jià)問題[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);1998年03期

7 沈家煊;語用法的語法化[J];福建外語;1998年02期

8 羅瑞球;英語中動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的句法、語義特征[J];廣西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年04期

9 張國(guó)憲;論雙價(jià)形容詞對(duì)句法結(jié)構(gòu)的選擇[J];淮北煤師院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1995年03期

10 南潮;;最簡(jiǎn)方案框架下的中間結(jié)構(gòu)研究[J];湖北師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：1443175