本文選題：存現(xiàn)動(dòng)詞　切入點(diǎn)：非賓格假設(shè)　出處：《中南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：非賓格假設(shè)以關(guān)系語(yǔ)法為基礎(chǔ),將傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)法意義上的不及物動(dòng)詞進(jìn)一步分為非賓格動(dòng)詞和非作格動(dòng)詞。雖然兩者都只有一個(gè)論元,且其唯一的論元通常都出現(xiàn)在動(dòng)詞的前面位置充當(dāng)句子的表層結(jié)構(gòu)主語(yǔ),但兩類(lèi)動(dòng)詞的深層結(jié)構(gòu)及論元的深層邏輯語(yǔ)義關(guān)系并不相同,非賓格動(dòng)詞的終極主語(yǔ)為其起始直接賓語(yǔ),即表層結(jié)構(gòu)中的主語(yǔ)是深層結(jié)構(gòu)中的邏輯賓語(yǔ),而非作格動(dòng)詞的終極主語(yǔ)是其起始主語(yǔ),即表層結(jié)構(gòu)中的主語(yǔ)也就是深層結(jié)構(gòu)中的主語(yǔ)。非賓格動(dòng)詞主要出現(xiàn)在存現(xiàn)句中。此外,被動(dòng)句由于只能有一個(gè)論元,也可歸為非賓格動(dòng)詞。本文主要探討英漢語(yǔ)中存現(xiàn)句中非賓格動(dòng)詞的賦格問(wèn)題,特別是漢語(yǔ)中保留賓語(yǔ)的句法本質(zhì)問(wèn)題。 本文首先結(jié)合相關(guān)語(yǔ)言事實(shí),在轉(zhuǎn)換生成語(yǔ)法框架內(nèi),特別是在最簡(jiǎn)方案平臺(tái)上分析了與非賓格假設(shè)的相關(guān)理論假設(shè)和句法操作技術(shù),包括轉(zhuǎn)換生成語(yǔ)法的哲學(xué)承諾、論旨理論、格理論、論元結(jié)構(gòu)、合并和特征核查等。 本文第二章詳細(xì)分析了存現(xiàn)句和非賓格假設(shè)。英語(yǔ)存現(xiàn)句的基本形式為there be和方所倒裝結(jié)構(gòu),而漢語(yǔ)中的存現(xiàn)句主要有方所倒裝結(jié)構(gòu),以及部分由系動(dòng)詞“是”表現(xiàn)存在的結(jié)構(gòu)。存現(xiàn)句的定指效應(yīng)實(shí)際是對(duì)語(yǔ)言不充分觀察的基礎(chǔ)上的一個(gè)結(jié)論,存現(xiàn)句的事件結(jié)構(gòu)與非賓格假設(shè)有一定的相關(guān)性,但其句法操作和賦格問(wèn)題并沒(méi)有得到完滿(mǎn)的解釋。本章還詳細(xì)討論了非賓格動(dòng)詞的句法性質(zhì),提出了綜合診斷語(yǔ)言中的非賓格動(dòng)詞。 第三章討論漢語(yǔ)非賓格動(dòng)詞中的保留賓語(yǔ)問(wèn)題。在充分觀察保留賓語(yǔ)的基礎(chǔ)上,我們?cè)敿?xì)分析了現(xiàn)有分析模式的優(yōu)勢(shì)和缺陷。我們接受了移位假說(shuō),并認(rèn)為在移位之前的兩個(gè)[DP]構(gòu)成一個(gè)小句結(jié)構(gòu)。其賦格在移位之前已經(jīng)完成,而移位的原因是結(jié)構(gòu)穩(wěn)定性和拼讀。由于兩個(gè)[DP]在同一句法層次,導(dǎo)致結(jié)構(gòu)不穩(wěn)定；且兩個(gè)同一層次的[DP]違反了識(shí)別原則,從而不能在PF層面實(shí)行拼讀。我們的分析模式比以前各模式更有解釋力和概括力,并有力地解釋了擔(dān)當(dāng)小句主語(yǔ)的[DP]不能移位。
[Abstract]:On the basis of relational grammar, the unobjectivity hypothesis further divides intransitive verbs in the traditional grammatical sense into unobjective verbs and non-ergative verbs, although both of them have only one argument. The only argument usually appears in the front of the verb as the surface structure subject of the sentence, but the deep structure of the two kinds of verbs and the deep logical semantic relation of the argument are not the same. The ultimate subject of a non-objective verb is its starting direct object, that is, the subject in the surface structure is the logical object in the deep structure, but the final subject of the non-case verb is its starting subject. That is, the subject in the surface structure is the subject in the deep structure. The non-object verb mainly appears in the existential sentence. In addition, the passive sentence can only have one argument, This paper mainly discusses the fugue of non-object verbs in the existential sentences in English and Chinese, especially the syntactic essence of retaining objects in Chinese. Based on the relevant linguistic facts, this paper first analyzes the relevant theoretical assumptions and syntactic manipulation techniques, including the philosophical commitment of transformational generative grammar, within the framework of transformational generative grammar, especially on the platform of the simplest scheme. Theory of tenor, lattice theory, argument element structure, merging and feature checking, etc. In the second chapter, we analyze the existential sentence and the non-objective hypothesis in detail. The basic form of the existential sentence in English is there be and square inverted structure, while in Chinese the existential sentence mainly consists of square inverted structure. In fact, the definite effect of existential sentence is a conclusion based on insufficient observation of language. The event structure of existential sentence is related to the supposition of unobjective case. However, the syntactic manipulation and fugue problems have not been fully explained. This chapter also discusses the syntactic properties of non-object verbs in detail, and puts forward the non-object verbs in Synthetical Diagnostic language. In chapter three, we discuss the problem of reserved objects in Chinese unobjectivistic verbs. On the basis of fully observing the reserved objects, we analyze in detail the advantages and disadvantages of the existing analytical models, and we accept the shift hypothesis. It is considered that the two [DP] before the shift constitute a clause structure, whose fugue has been completed before the shift, and the reason of the shift is structural stability and spelling. The two [DP] are in the same syntactic level, which leads to the structural instability. Moreover, two [DP] at the same level violate the recognition principle, so we can not spell it at PF level. Our analytical model is more explanatory and generalizable than the previous models, and it can explain that [DP], which acts as the subject of clauses, can not be shifted.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：H314;H146

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 唐玉柱;存現(xiàn)動(dòng)詞的非賓格性假設(shè)[J];重慶大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年04期

2 徐杰;兩種保留賓語(yǔ)句式及相關(guān)句法理論問(wèn)題[J];當(dāng)代語(yǔ)言學(xué);1999年01期

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

4 沈園;邏輯判斷基本類(lèi)型及其在語(yǔ)言中的反映[J];當(dāng)代語(yǔ)言學(xué);2000年03期

5 寧春巖;;在MP理論平臺(tái)上的人類(lèi)語(yǔ)言研究[J];當(dāng)代語(yǔ)言學(xué);2011年03期

6 唐玉柱;存現(xiàn)句中的there[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);2001年01期

7 朱行帆;輕動(dòng)詞和漢語(yǔ)不及物動(dòng)詞帶賓語(yǔ)現(xiàn)象[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);2005年03期

8 李京廉,王克非;英漢存現(xiàn)句的句法研究[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);2005年04期

9 顧陽(yáng);關(guān)于存現(xiàn)結(jié)構(gòu)的理論探討[J];現(xiàn)代外語(yǔ);1997年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1569746