【摘要】：本研究重點關注漢語中的翻轉結構，即“五個人吃了一鍋飯”（本文稱為“翻轉A式”）與“一鍋飯吃了五個人”（本文稱為“翻轉B式”）之類的成對句式。 翻轉結構因其各種令人迷惑的特征引起漢語語法界的廣泛興趣。原有的一些研究認為翻轉A、B兩句式之間存在派生關系。在兩者中，，動詞之前的名詞性成分為論元作主語，動詞之后的名詞成分為論元作賓語。依據該分析，對應的翻轉A、B式屬于論元成分語序倒轉的句子。因此，如果將對應翻轉B式句中的主語論元與賓語論元交換句法位置可以派生出翻轉A式句；相反，如果將對應翻轉A式句中的主語論元與賓語論元交換句法位置則可以派生出翻轉B式句。如果類似分析成立，翻轉結構則對包括題元理論、格理論、約束理論在內的諸多普遍語法原則和理論構成嚴重挑戰(zhàn)。 本論文的首要目的是證明漢語翻轉結構并非已有普遍語法原則與理論的真正反例。在放棄固有的模式的“一個動詞”分析法后，我們提出“兩個動詞”分析法，將翻轉A式結構中的謂語動詞視為常規(guī)及物動詞，而將翻轉B式結構中的謂語動詞分析為不及物性系動詞，類似于英語中的measure、cost及weigh,本質上具有非賓格性質。據此假設，翻轉A、B對應句式之間的所有重要的語義與句法差異均可得到合理解釋。作為典型的及物動詞，翻轉A式的動詞帶有施事外論元與客體（受事/處所）內論元；用以表示行為動作，接受施事傾向性修飾語，允許被動化。相形之下，由于翻轉B式的動詞的系動詞與非賓格屬性，以動詞之前的客體（受事/處所）名詞成分為內論元，而以動詞之后的名詞成分為謂詞性補足語；用以表示狀態(tài)，不接受施事傾向性修飾語，也不可被動化。 有關翻轉A、B對應句式之間存在派生關系的傳統(tǒng)假設無論從理論方面，還是經驗方面考慮都應該摒棄。關鍵之處在于其所設想的主語論元移入動詞后的賓語位置以及賓語論元移入動詞前的主語位置的句法操作均缺乏動因而無法操作。 本文在一個基于Chomsky句法語段理論的解釋新方案中為翻轉A、B句式的句法生成提出了不同的生成模式。具體來說，在翻轉A式中，及物動詞與其名詞論元補足語合并成VP。該VP結構然后作為補足語與一個強力的抽象及物性輕動詞v合并，并且將動詞吸引上來附加，再與施事論元合并構成vP。接下來，vP與時態(tài)中心語T合并，施事論元與T（隱性地）形成一致并提升移位到主語Spec-TP位置。在翻轉B式中，不及物性系動詞首先與謂詞性名詞補足語合并，然后與內論元標志語合并構成VP。該VP與一個無外論元的不及物性輕動詞v合并，強力詞綴性輕動詞v吸引動詞的附加，形成vP。與T合并后，T充當探頭，VP內的名詞論元因其未賦值格特征而具有活性從而被確定為目標。T與論元（隱性地）形成一致，賦予其（隱性的）主格，并吸引其移位到主語Spec-TP位置。根據這一分析，翻轉B式句中動詞之后的名詞成分作為動詞的謂詞性補足語，免受名詞論元所受到的格要求。
[Abstract]:This study focuses on the inversion structure in Chinese, that is, "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted A") and "five people eat a pot of rice" (hereinafter referred to as "inverted B") and so on.
Some previous studies have suggested that there is a derivative relationship between inversion A and inversion B. In both cases, the nominal element before the verb is the subject and the noun element after the verb is the object. Therefore, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted B-sentence can be derived from the inverted A-sentence; on the contrary, if the subject argument and the object argument exchange syntactic position in the corresponding inverted A-sentence can be derived from the inverted B-sentence. The reversal structure poses a serious challenge to many universal grammatical principles and theories, including thematic theory, case theory and constraint theory.
The primary purpose of this paper is to prove that the Chinese reversal structure is not a real counterexample of the existing universal grammar principles and theories. After abandoning the "one verb" analysis method of the inherent pattern, we propose the "two verbs" analysis method, which regards the predicate verbs in the reversal A structure as the conventional transitive verbs and the predicate in the reversal B structure as the normal transitive verbs. Verb analysis is an intransitive verb, similar to measure, cost and weight in English, which is essentially unaccusative. It is assumed that all the important semantic and syntactic differences between the corresponding sentences of inversion A and B can be reasonably explained. In contrast, the object (subject/place) noun element before the verb is used as the internal argument, and the noun element after the verb is used as the predicate complement because of the reversal of the binomial and unaccusative attributes of the verb of type B. State, not accepting agent oriented modifiers, nor passive.
The traditional hypothesis that there is a derivative relationship between the inverted A and the corresponding B sentence pattern should be abandoned both theoretically and experimentally. The key point is that the syntactic operation of the object position after the subject argument moves into the verb and the subject position before the object argument moves into the verb is inactive and therefore can not be operated.
In a new scheme of interpretation based on Chomsky's syntactic segmental theory, this paper proposes different patterns for the syntactic generation of inverted A and B sentences. Specifically, in inverted A, the transitive verb and its nominal argument complement are combined into VP. The VP structure is then combined as a complement with a strong Abstract transitive light verb v, and Then, the agent argument and T (implicitly) form the same and move to the subject Spec-TP position. In the inverted B form, the intransitive verb first merges with the predicate noun complement, and then merges with the inner argument marker to form VP. The VP merges with an intransitive light verb V without an external argument, and the strong affix light verb V attracts the addition of the verb, forming a probe into the combination of vP. and T. The nominal argument in the VP is identified as the target because of its unassigned case characteristics. T is consistent with the argument (implicitly), endows it with (implicitly) the nominative and attracts it. According to this analysis, the noun element after the verb in the B-sentence is inverted as the predicative complement of the verb, which avoids the case requirement of the noun argument.
【學位授予單位】：廣東外語外貿大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：H146

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前4條

1 丁加勇;;容納句的數量關系、句法特征及認知解釋[J];漢語學報;2006年01期

2 鹿榮;;供用類可逆句式的認知語義表現[J];漢語學習;2012年02期

3 余祥越;黎金娥;;“人喝酒”與“酒喝人”——最簡方案框架下的漢英動詞句法差異比較[J];外語研究;2006年01期

4 陸儉明;;“句式語法”理論與漢語研究[J];中國語文;2004年05期

本文編號：2250272