英語反致使結(jié)構(gòu)和中動結(jié)構(gòu)在句法和語義上都有相似之處,一直以來很容易被混淆。然而,兩種結(jié)構(gòu)在句法和語義方面也存在不少差異。以往文獻(xiàn)極少有針對兩種結(jié)構(gòu)的系統(tǒng)的對比研究。因此,本研究在生成構(gòu)建思想基礎(chǔ)上,從句法-語義界面的視角,對比兩種句式在相同的狀態(tài)變化事件語境中在事件結(jié)構(gòu)vP和時體結(jié)構(gòu)TP方面的異同。根據(jù)句法-語義界面研究領(lǐng)域的組合原則,句法與語義之間具有同構(gòu)性。因此,句法方面,本研究采用激進(jìn)生成構(gòu)建思想（特別是Borer的外骨架思想）的零特征詞根假設(shè)為全文的核心句法假設(shè),同時運用基本的句法操作如合并與移動來分析每個句式的生成。語義方面,本研究結(jié)合新戴維森事件語義學(xué)和時間指示語義學(xué)的研究成果解釋每種句法結(jié)構(gòu)的事件結(jié)構(gòu)和時間結(jié)構(gòu)。具體來講,本文結(jié)合致使論和語義體論,對比兩種句式在vP事件建構(gòu)層面上語義特征的異同,同時探討每個句法的生成層面、及物性轉(zhuǎn)換以及論元的語義限制等問題。為了對比兩種句式在時間域TP層面的異同,本文借鑒時體指示理論來解釋每種句式相應(yīng)的句法結(jié)構(gòu),同時回答為什么反致使句可以表征真實具體事件而中動句則不能。總之,本文旨在結(jié)合針對事件、時和體的句法和語義分析方法來解釋兩種句式在... 

【文章來源】：山東大學(xué)山東省 211工程院校 985工程院校 教育部直屬院校

【文章頁數(shù)】：210 頁

【學(xué)位級別】：博士

【文章目錄】：
Abstract
摘要
List of Abbreviations and Notations
Chapter One Introduction
    1.1 Clarification of Notions
        1.1.1 The Notion of the Middle Construction
        1.1.2 The Notion of the Anticausative construction
        1.1.3 The Change of State Context
    1.2 A Brief Literature Review
    1.3 Objective of This Dissertation
    1.4 Organization of This Dissertation
Chapter Two Theoretical Background
    2.1 Syntactic Foundation for the Generative-constructivism
        2.1.1 Split Hypotheses and Grammatical Domains
        2.1.2 Case, Merge and Movement
    2.2 The Generative -constructivist Framework
        2.2.1 vP
            2.2.1.1 Light verb
            2.2.1.2 Zero-dressed Root View
            2.2.1.3 Aspectual Approach and Causal Approach
            2.2.1.4 Semantic Aspect and Grammatical Aspect
            2.2.1.5 vP, AspP and TP
        2.2.2 Split TP
            2.2.2.1 Tense and Aspect
            2.2.2.2 Difference of Voice from Tense and Aspect
    2.3 The Formal Model for the Generative-Constructivist Approach
        2.3.1 Event Variable and Time Variable
        2.3.2 Tense, tense and Time
    2.4 Critical Review of the Generative -constructivist Model
Chapter Three Comparison of Distributions ofVerbal Roots in Anticausative and Middle constructions
    3.1 Previous Studies
        3.1.1 The Mainstream Generative Approach
            3.1.1.1 The Lexical-driven Approach
            3.1.1.2 The Syntactic-driven approach
        3.1.2 The Generative-constructivist Approach
    3.2 The Synthetic generative-constructivist View of ThisDissertation
        3.2.1 Derivations at Syntactic Level
        3.2.2 Distribution of Root in Syntax
        3.2.3 Severing External and Internal Arguments from the Root
    3.3 Interim Summary
Chapter Four Comparison of vP betweenAnticausative and Middle constructions
    4.1 Inner Features of vP
        4.1.1 Event Flavors of Light verbs
            4.1.1.1 Aspectual Approach vs. Causal Approach
            4.1.1.2 Eventuality
    4.2 VBECOME'P in Both Constructions
        4.2.1 Merge of VBECOME and the Verbal Root
        4.2.2 Introducing Internal Argument
    4.3 VCAUSE and Voice
        4.3.1 VCAUSE
        4.3.2 Introducing External Argument:VCAUSE vs.Voice
        4.3.3 Thematic Role of External Argument
    4.4 Binary Feature of Causer and Event Identification
        4.4.1 Causer vs. Agent
        4.4.2 VCAUSE, Voice and Event Identification
        4.4.3 Binary Feature of Causer in Causative Construction
        4.4.4 Implicit Semantic Roles
            4.4.4.1 Implicit Causer in the Anticausative Construction
            4.4.4.2 Implicit Agent in the Middle Construction
    4.5 Transitivity Alternation
        4.5.1 Anticausative Verb
        4.5.2 A Common-base Approach to Anticausative Verb
        4.5.3 Implicit Causer in the Anticausative Construction
        4.5.4 Transitivity Alternation of Middle verb
        4.5.5 A Common-base Approach to Middle verb
        4.5.6 Implicit Agent in the Middle Construction
        4.5.7 Obligatory Modifier in the Middle Construction
    4.6 Quantification and Affectedness of Theme Subject
        4.6.1 Quantification and Telicity of Event in the AnticausativeConsturction
        4.6.2 Quantification and Generic use in the Middle Construction
        4.6.3 Affectedness and the Anticausative
        4.6.4 Affectedness and the Middle
            4.6.4.1 Non-necessity of Affectedness for the Middle Construction
            4.6.4.2 Agent Not Equal to Doer
    4.7 Interim Summary
Chapter Five Comparison of Split TP between the Anticausative and theMiddle
    5.1 Semantics and Syntax of Tense
        5.1.1 Time as Entity Hypothesis
        5.1.2 Semantic Accounts for Tense
        5.1.3 Syntactic Accounts for Tense
        5.1.4 Parallelism between Tense and Aspect
        5.1.5 Ramchand's Model of Tense
        5.1.6 Enlightenment
    5.2 Split TP in Anticausative Construction
        5.2.1 Simple Past Tense and Default Perfect Aspect
        5.2.2 Basic Structure of Split TP
            5.2.2.1 Syntactic Representation
            5.2.2.2 A-Movement and Head Movement
        5.2.3 Temporal Representation
            5.2.3.1 Time Variables
            5.2.3.2 The Semantic Function of Tense
            5.2.3.3 The Semantic Function of Grammatical Aspect
        5.2.4 Semantic Translation
        5.2.5 Perfectivity and Telicity of Event
        5.2.6 Overt Aspectual Form
    5.3 Split TP in Middle Construction
        5.3.1 Present Tense
        5.3.2 Syntactic Representation of Middle Construction
            5.3.2.1 Bare Grammatical Aspect
            5.3.2.2 Topicalization
            5.3.2.3 Case Checking
            5.3.2.4 T to C Movement
        5.3.3 Temporal Semantic Interpretation
    5.4 Interim Summary
Chapter Six Conclusion
    6.1 Findings and Theoretic Implications
        6.1.1 Findings
        6.1.2 Theoretic Implications
    6.2 Limitations and Suggestions
References
Acknowledgements
學(xué)位論文評閱及答辯情況表


【參考文獻(xiàn)】：
期刊論文
[1]基于事件輕動詞理論的致使性交替現(xiàn)象研究[J]. 楊大然.  解放軍外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報. 2015(03)
[2]構(gòu)式語法研究的歷時取向——歷時構(gòu)式語法論綱[J]. 文旭,楊坤.  中國外語. 2015(01)
[3]從動詞類型學(xué)到體算子情態(tài)論——英美語言學(xué)傳統(tǒng)中的體態(tài)理論演進(jìn)管窺[J]. 尚新.  外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報). 2014(03)
[4]區(qū)分兩類領(lǐng)主屬賓句的實證理據(jù)和理論意義[J]. 馬志剛,肖奇民.  天津外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報. 2014(01)
[5]事件結(jié)構(gòu)與英語語態(tài)[J]. 謝國平.  浙江外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報. 2014(01)
[6]句法研究的意向性解釋[J]. 何愛晶.  中國外語. 2013(05)
[7]英語中動語態(tài)的構(gòu)式意義研究[J]. 司聯(lián)合.  外語與外語教學(xué). 2013(04)
[8]新構(gòu)式語法的外框架模式與漢語短語研究[J]. 袁野.  外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報). 2013(03)
[9]英語中動結(jié)構(gòu)的句法-語義界面研究[J]. 高秀雪.  外語教學(xué)與研究. 2013(01)
[10]認(rèn)知和生成學(xué)派視角下的構(gòu)式理論對比研究——以構(gòu)式語法和第一語段句法為例[J]. 胡旭輝.  外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報). 2012(03)

博士論文
[1]受事賓語提升的最簡主義研究[D]. 南潮.中南大學(xué) 2012



本文編號：3411220