【摘要】：在生成語法的框架內(nèi)，主語與話題在句法結(jié)構(gòu)中占有不同的句法位置，有各自的特征。然而對(duì)于限定詞短語做主語是毫無疑問的，可是一旦子句出現(xiàn)在主語位置時(shí)，其主語地位就遭到了質(zhì)疑。有人認(rèn)為子句主語是話題有人認(rèn)為是主語。針對(duì)這個(gè)問題上面存在的爭(zhēng)議，本文試圖通過自己對(duì)語言事實(shí)的觀察與論證探討漢語句子（主要是被動(dòng)句）中子句主語的句法地位以及與英語的不同。 本文采用英漢對(duì)比的方式，通過對(duì)子句做主語在英漢兩種語言中的分布和使用的觀察，找出兩種語言中子句主語用法的差異性，并結(jié)合漢語被動(dòng)句自身的特點(diǎn)最終明確漢語句首子句的句法地位。首先，我們調(diào)查了漢英兩種語言中主動(dòng)句與被動(dòng)句轉(zhuǎn)化關(guān)系的對(duì)比。Alrenga(2005)的分析指出，英語被動(dòng)允許句首子句出現(xiàn)的前提是謂語動(dòng)詞在主動(dòng)句中允許DP補(bǔ)語的存在。通過觀察漢語的語言事實(shí)，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)并沒有這種主被動(dòng)不對(duì)稱現(xiàn)象，只有部分動(dòng)詞與英語對(duì)應(yīng)詞語的用法相似，那么漢語句首子句跟英語是否一樣呢？這就關(guān)系到第二個(gè)對(duì)比，英漢被動(dòng)結(jié)構(gòu)的對(duì)比。由于英語主動(dòng)句在轉(zhuǎn)化為被動(dòng)句時(shí)，賓語要提升至被動(dòng)主語的位置來獲得格，而在原來的位置留下語跡，使得被動(dòng)句可以滿足EPP原則。然而漢語被動(dòng)句中有很多保留賓語的現(xiàn)象不能用英語的方法得到解釋，梅廣(1972),李艷慧(1985),黃正德(2001)，認(rèn)為漢語的“被”是個(gè)二元謂詞，句首子句充當(dāng)“被”的論元。漢語被動(dòng)句中句首子句是話題的假設(shè)就站不住腳。 本文通過對(duì)漢語中子句主語分布與DP主語分布的深入調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)，可以修飾DP主語的副詞也可以修飾子句主語，并且副詞與兩者的相對(duì)位置也是一樣的，這可以從一定程度上說明句首子句的主語身份。另外，由于在句法結(jié)構(gòu)中，主語的姐妹節(jié)點(diǎn)是謂語成分，話題的姐妹節(jié)點(diǎn)是說明成分，根據(jù)蔣自新(1991)的論證，通過否定詞、修飾語、以及是否能形成“V不V”問句來證明哪個(gè)節(jié)點(diǎn)是謂語成分，哪個(gè)節(jié)點(diǎn)是話題成分，由此可以間接地分辨出主語成分與話題成分。 根據(jù)子句主語與DP主語在分布上的相似性，，以及漢語子句主語非限定性的特點(diǎn)，本文最后假設(shè)漢語的子句主語其實(shí)是一個(gè)隱性的CP。正是由于漢語的CP跟DP一樣都可以作為句子主語，因此它們具有分布的一致性，并且都要受格。CP要受格的論證有利于為CP主語建立跨語言的句法一致性。
[Abstract]:In the framework of generative grammar, subject and topic occupy different syntactic positions in syntactic structure and have their own characteristics. However, there is no doubt that the qualifier phrase is subject, but once the clause appears in the subject position, its subject position is questioned. Some people think that a clause subject is a topic. Some people think it is a subject. In view of the controversy over this problem, this paper attempts to explore the syntactic status of the subject of subsentence in Chinese sentences (mainly passive sentences) by observing and demonstrating the linguistic facts and the differences between Chinese sentences (mainly passive sentences) and English. In this paper, through the observation of the distribution and use of clause as subject in English and Chinese, the author finds out the difference in the usage of subject in subsentence between the two languages, by comparing it with English and Chinese, and through the observation of the distribution and use of clause in English and Chinese. Combined with the characteristics of the Chinese passive sentence, the syntactic status of the first clause of the Chinese sentence is finally clarified. Firstly, we investigate the contrast between active sentence and passive sentence transformation in Chinese and English. Alrenga (2005) points out that the premise of the first clause of passive permissible sentence in English is that predicate verbs allow the existence of DP complement in the active sentence. By looking at the linguistic facts of Chinese, we find that there is no such phenomenon of active-passive asymmetry, but only some verbs are similar to their English counterparts. So is the first clause of Chinese sentence the same as that of English? This relates to the second contrast, the contrast between English and Chinese passive structures. When English active sentence is transformed into passive sentence, the object should be promoted to the position of passive subject to obtain the case, and the original position should be left behind, which makes the passive sentence satisfy the EPP principle. However, there are many phenomena in Chinese passive sentences that can not be explained in English. Mei Guang (1972), Li Yanhui (1985) and Huang Zhengde (2001) think that "Wu" in Chinese is a binary predicate. The first clause of the sentence serves as the argument of "be". The assumption that the first clause in a Chinese passive sentence is a topic cannot stand up. Through an in-depth investigation of the distribution of subject and DP subject in Chinese subsentence, it is found that the adverbs that can modify the subject of DP can also modify the subject of clause, and the relative position of adverbs is the same as that of the two. To some extent, this can explain the subject identity of the first clause of a sentence. In addition, because in syntactic structure, the sister node of subject is predicate component, and the sister node of topic is declarative element, according to Jiang Zixin (1991), through negative words and modifiers, And whether the "V not V" question can be formed to prove which node is the predicate component and which node is the topic component can be used to distinguish the subject component from the topic component indirectly. According to the similarity between clause subject and DP subject in distribution, as well as the non-definiteness of Chinese clause subject, this paper finally assumes that the clause subject in Chinese is actually an implicit CP.. It is precisely because the Chinese CP can be used as the sentence subject just like DP, so they have the same distribution and are subject to the case. CP should be proved by the case in favor of establishing the cross-language syntactic consistency for the CP subject.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：H146;H314

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 范曉;;被字句謂語動(dòng)詞的語義特征[J];長江學(xué)術(shù);2006年02期

2 李京廉,劉娟;漢語的限定與非限定研究[J];漢語學(xué)習(xí);2005年01期

3 亢世勇;現(xiàn)代漢語謂賓動(dòng)詞分類統(tǒng)計(jì)研究[J];遼寧師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1998年01期

4 陳存軍;主題和主語說略[J];外語教學(xué);1999年01期

5 陳腦沖;論“主語”[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;1993年04期

6 金積令;英漢語主題結(jié)構(gòu)的對(duì)比研究[J];外國語(上海外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1991年02期

7 張愛玲,蘇曉軍;話題突顯結(jié)構(gòu)與漢英中間語[J];外國語(上海外國語大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2002年04期

8 石定栩;漢語主題句的特性[J];現(xiàn)代外語;1998年02期

9 袁毓林;;話題化及相關(guān)的語法過程[J];中國語文;1996年04期

10 方立!100083,紀(jì)凌云!100083;主題化結(jié)構(gòu)[J];語言教學(xué)與研究;1999年04期

本文編號(hào)：2469247