本文選題：哪里 + where�。� 參考：《湖南師范大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：作為疑問(wèn)信息的主要載體,疑問(wèn)詞充當(dāng)著漢英特指問(wèn)句的核心成分。鑒于其地位的重要性,國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者對(duì)疑問(wèn)詞的用法進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的分類與描寫,并從傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)法、轉(zhuǎn)換生成語(yǔ)法、認(rèn)知語(yǔ)法等多個(gè)角度對(duì)上述用法進(jìn)行了細(xì)致的解釋與分析,從而獲得了大量寶貴的研究成果,為本文的研究奠定了堅(jiān)實(shí)的理論基礎(chǔ)。 在已有研究的基礎(chǔ)上,本文嘗試借助對(duì)比語(yǔ)言學(xué)和認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)中的相關(guān)理論對(duì)漢語(yǔ)疑問(wèn)詞“哪里”和英語(yǔ)疑問(wèn)詞"where"的疑問(wèn)用法和非疑問(wèn)用法進(jìn)行對(duì)比,通過(guò)對(duì)相關(guān)語(yǔ)言事實(shí)的整理歸納,找出這兩類用法之間的異同以及形成這些異同的原因,并以此為基礎(chǔ),從認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)的角度對(duì)這兩個(gè)詞的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程進(jìn)行分析,總結(jié)出漢英疑問(wèn)詞用法發(fā)展的普遍規(guī)律。 “哪里”和"where"之間的共性主要體現(xiàn)在它們的疑問(wèn)用法上。這兩者之間之所以存在可比性是因?yàn)樗鼈兊幕竟δ芏际怯脕?lái)詢問(wèn)未知的場(chǎng)所,具有相同的核心意義,由此構(gòu)成了對(duì)比分析的基礎(chǔ)。在表達(dá)疑問(wèn)功能時(shí),這兩者具有相似的句法功能�！澳睦铩焙�"where"都可充當(dāng)特指問(wèn)句的賓語(yǔ)和狀語(yǔ),也可獨(dú)立成句,在大多數(shù)情況下還可以互譯。然而,這兩者之間的差異性亦十分明顯：在一般情況下,“哪里”可以出現(xiàn)在其所屬特指問(wèn)句的幾乎所有位置,而"where"卻必須一直位于句首。這說(shuō)明兩者的疑問(wèn)用法雖然大體相似,但也有不同之處。 除了疑問(wèn)用法之外,“哪里”和"where"還發(fā)展出了任指、虛指、否定等非疑問(wèn)用法。其中,任指用法和虛指用法是其共有用法,否定用法為“哪里”特有,而用作從句標(biāo)記引導(dǎo)關(guān)系小句的功能專屬于“where”。此外,即使這兩者用于任指或虛指,其具體表達(dá)方式也并非總是互相對(duì)應(yīng)。上述現(xiàn)象說(shuō)明與疑問(wèn)用法相比,“哪里”和“where”的非疑問(wèn)用法更多地體現(xiàn)了各自語(yǔ)言的個(gè)性。 不過(guò),盡管這兩者的兩大類用法之間都存在不少差異,它們從疑問(wèn)用法向非疑問(wèn)用法演變的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程卻是高度相似的�！澳睦铩焙汀皐here”的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程主要受到語(yǔ)義機(jī)制和句法機(jī)制的制約：原始意義充當(dāng)演變的固有基礎(chǔ),句法環(huán)境提供演變的具體途徑。另外,這兩者的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程具有主觀性和單向性的特征,受這兩個(gè)特征的影響,這兩個(gè)詞原始的詢問(wèn)功能不斷減弱而衍生的表達(dá)功能不斷增強(qiáng)。換言之,“哪里”和“where”的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程是一種疑問(wèn)意義不斷減少而非疑問(wèn)意義不斷增多的主觀化過(guò)程。 總而言之,本文對(duì)“哪里”和“where”的疑問(wèn)用法和非疑問(wèn)用法進(jìn)行了較為全面的分析,找出并解釋了這兩類用法之間的異同,并從認(rèn)知層面分析了這兩者的語(yǔ)法化過(guò)程,概括得出了支配其用法發(fā)展變化的規(guī)律,從而有望進(jìn)一步豐富漢英疑問(wèn)詞的對(duì)比研究,同時(shí)能夠?yàn)閲?guó)內(nèi)的英、漢語(yǔ)教學(xué)工作提供一定的幫助。
[Abstract]:As the main carrier of interrogative information, interrogative words act as the core component of Chinese-English special question.In view of the importance of its status, scholars at home and abroad have classified and described the usage of interrogative words in detail, and explained and analyzed the above usage from the perspectives of traditional grammar, transformational generative grammar, cognitive grammar and so on.Thus, a large number of valuable research results have been obtained, which has laid a solid theoretical foundation for this study.On the basis of previous studies, this paper attempts to compare the interrogative and non-interrogative usage of the Chinese interrogative word "where" and the English interrogative word "where" with the relevant theories in contrastive linguistics and cognitive linguistics.By summarizing the relevant linguistic facts, we find out the similarities and differences between the two kinds of usage and the reasons for these similarities and differences, and on this basis, analyze the grammaticalization process of these two words from the perspective of cognitive linguistics.The general law of the development of Chinese and English interrogative words is summarized.The commonality between "where" and "where" is mainly in their interrogative usage.The reason for the comparability between the two is that their basic functions are used to inquire about unknown places, which have the same core significance, and thus form the basis of comparative analysis.In expressing interrogative functions, the two have similar syntactic functions.Both "where" and "where" can be used as objects and adverbials of specific questions, or as independent sentences, and in most cases can be translated to each other.However, the difference between the two is also very obvious: in general, "where" can appear in almost every position of its specific question, while "where" must always be at the beginning of the sentence.This shows that the two interrogative usage although generally similar, but there are differences.In addition to interrogative usage, "where" and "where" have developed non-interrogative usages such as random, fictitious, negative, etc.Among them, the usage of Ren finger and the usage of virtual finger are the common usage, the negative usage is unique to "where", and the function of the clause used as the clause to mark and guide the relation belongs to "where".Moreover, even if the two are used for any or virtual finger, their specific expressions do not always correspond to each other.The above phenomenon shows that the non-interrogative usage of "where" and "where" reflect the individuality of their respective languages more than interrogative usage.However, although there are many differences between the two kinds of usage, their grammaticalization process from interrogative usage to non-interrogative usage is highly similar.The grammaticalization process of "where" and "where" is mainly restricted by semantic mechanism and syntactic mechanism: the primitive meaning serves as the inherent basis of evolution, and the syntactic environment provides the specific way of evolution.In addition, the grammaticalization process of these two words has the characteristics of subjectivity and unidirection. Under the influence of these two characteristics, the original inquiry function of the two words is weakened and the derived expression function is enhanced.In other words, the grammaticalization process of "where" and "where" is a subjective process in which the interrogative meaning is decreasing, rather than the interrogative meaning increasing.In a word, this paper makes a comprehensive analysis of the interrogative and non-interrogative usage of "where" and "where", finds out and explains the similarities and differences between the two types of usage, and analyzes their grammaticalization process from the cognitive perspective.It is expected to further enrich the contrastive study of Chinese and English interrogative words, and at the same time provide some help for the teaching of English and Chinese in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H146;H314

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張俊閣;;近代漢語(yǔ)疑問(wèn)詞“那”“、那里”的語(yǔ)義特征與源流考證[J];山西大同大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年05期

2 楊文芳;;where的使用和翻譯[J];大學(xué)英語(yǔ)(學(xué)術(shù)版);2006年02期

3 唐燕玲;蘭靜;唐科;;英漢疑問(wèn)詞移位與否的原因分析[J];解放軍外國(guó)語(yǔ)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年06期

4 錢華英;英漢疑問(wèn)句比較研究[J];江南學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1998年03期

5 張其云;劉小玲;;論語(yǔ)法化現(xiàn)象內(nèi)部機(jī)制的認(rèn)知體驗(yàn)基礎(chǔ)[J];外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊;2009年02期

6 唐燕玲;;疑問(wèn)詞的語(yǔ)法化機(jī)制和特征[J];外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊;2009年05期

7 何元建;特指問(wèn)句標(biāo)記的類型學(xué)特征[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;2003年03期

8 唐燕玲;石毓智;;語(yǔ)法結(jié)構(gòu)與功能衍生——形成英漢疑問(wèn)代詞衍生用法異同的原因[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;2011年04期

9 沈家煊;類型學(xué)中的標(biāo)記模式[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;1997年01期

10 唐燕玲;石毓智;;疑問(wèn)和焦點(diǎn)之關(guān)系[J];外國(guó)語(yǔ)(上海外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2009年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王瑞昀;英漢疑問(wèn)句類型學(xué)比較研究[D];上海外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 黎立夏;“哪”系疑問(wèn)代詞的非疑問(wèn)用法研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2011年

2 許敏;疑問(wèn)詞移位和疑問(wèn)詞原位[D];南京師范大學(xué);2003年

3 彭曉;漢語(yǔ)疑問(wèn)指稱詞無(wú)定指現(xiàn)象研究[D];四川大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1770356