【摘要】：自然語(yǔ)言中的量詞單調(diào)性特征指的是當(dāng)我們?cè)黾踊蛘邷p少NP或者VP所指謂的集合成員數(shù)量時(shí)，邏輯表達(dá)式的值是否會(huì)受到影響。單調(diào)性問(wèn)題是形式語(yǔ)義學(xué)研究中的重要課題，與廣義量詞現(xiàn)象關(guān)系密切。對(duì)單調(diào)性的研究已有三十多年的歷史，，國(guó)際語(yǔ)義學(xué)界對(duì)于單調(diào)性的理論探討已經(jīng)取得了豐富的成果，相比之下，結(jié)合漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)言事實(shí)的相關(guān)研究寥寥無(wú)幾。 本文主要是在BarwiseCooper(1981)的廣義量詞理論框架下，借助集合語(yǔ)言(settalk)和真值條件語(yǔ)義學(xué)(Truth-conditionalSemantics)研究漢語(yǔ)限定量化詞(D-quantifier)的主語(yǔ)單調(diào)性和謂語(yǔ)單調(diào)性。研究問(wèn)題主要有三個(gè)：1)漢語(yǔ)限定量詞有何單調(diào)性特征？2)根據(jù)漢語(yǔ)限定量詞的單調(diào)性特征，我們能否從單調(diào)性角度得出量詞的一些語(yǔ)義普遍性？3)除了單調(diào)性方面的普遍性，英漢語(yǔ)對(duì)應(yīng)的量詞還可能表現(xiàn)出單調(diào)性方面的差異，這些差異有哪些？如何得到解釋？ 關(guān)于第一個(gè)問(wèn)題，我們先從句法分布和語(yǔ)義解釋等方面描述了漢語(yǔ)中的部分限定量詞，然后應(yīng)用單調(diào)性理論分析漢語(yǔ)實(shí)例，得出典型的全稱量詞、存在量詞和模糊量詞的單調(diào)性特征，并將他們以表格的形式呈現(xiàn)出來(lái)。關(guān)于第二個(gè)問(wèn)題，我們通過(guò)觀察單調(diào)性分布規(guī)律，得出限定量詞的一些語(yǔ)義普遍性，如所有的存在量詞主語(yǔ)都單調(diào)遞增，謂語(yǔ)在肯定性語(yǔ)境中都單調(diào)遞增，在否定性語(yǔ)境中都單調(diào)遞減。關(guān)于最后一個(gè)問(wèn)題，我們從單調(diào)性出發(fā)，討論英漢語(yǔ)對(duì)應(yīng)量詞的不同之處。結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)，英語(yǔ)中有些單調(diào)量詞，在漢語(yǔ)中找不到與其相對(duì)應(yīng)的詞，比如no；漢語(yǔ)中另外一些量詞，雖然和英語(yǔ)中相對(duì)應(yīng)的詞具有相同的單調(diào)特征，但是在表達(dá)形式上卻不及英語(yǔ)簡(jiǎn)單。這些差異的原因可能歸于漢語(yǔ)是一門高度解析性的語(yǔ)言。 通過(guò)對(duì)漢語(yǔ)限定量詞的單調(diào)性特征研究，我們得出了單調(diào)量詞的一些語(yǔ)義普遍性和差異性，從而深化了已有的認(rèn)識(shí)。同時(shí)，由于限定量詞理論上具有不可窮盡性，加上我們討論的是漢語(yǔ)中的一些典型量詞，所以給本研究造成了不足之處。我們期待進(jìn)一步的研究去深化自然語(yǔ)言的形式語(yǔ)義處理。
[Abstract]:The monotone feature of classifiers in natural language refers to whether the value of logical expressions will be affected when we increase or decrease the number of collection members referred to by NP or VP. Monotonicity is an important topic in the study of formal semantics, which is closely related to the phenomenon of generalized classifiers. The study of monotonicity has been studied for more than 30 years. The theoretical discussion of monotonicity in the field of international semantics has made rich achievements. In contrast, there are few relevant studies combined with the facts of Chinese language. In this paper, the subject monotonicity and predicate monotonicity of Chinese qualified quantized words (D-quantifier) are studied by means of set language (settalk) and truth-valued conditional semantics (Truth-conditionalSemantics) under the framework of BarwiseCooper (1981)'s generalized quantifier theory. There are three main problems in the study: 1) what are the monotone characteristics of Chinese qualified classifiers? 2) according to the monotone characteristics of Chinese qualified classifiers, Can we get some semantic universality of classifiers from the perspective of monotonicity? 3) in addition to the universality of monotonicity, the corresponding classifiers in English and Chinese may also show monotone differences, what are these differences? How to get an explanation? With regard to the first problem, we first describe some qualified classifiers in Chinese from the aspects of syntactic distribution and semantic interpretation, and then apply monotonicity theory to analyze Chinese examples and obtain typical full-name classifiers. There are monotone characteristics of classifiers and fuzzy classifiers, and they are presented in the form of tables. With regard to the second problem, by observing the law of monotonicity distribution, we obtain some semantic universality of finite quantitative words, such as the monotone increment of all existential quantifiers and the monotonous increase of predicates in positive context. In the negative context, it is monotonous and decreasing. With regard to the last problem, we discuss the differences between English and Chinese corresponding classifiers from the point of view of monotonicity. It is found that there are some monotone classifiers in English, and no corresponding words can be found in Chinese, such as no;. Although some other classifiers in Chinese have the same monotone characteristics as the corresponding words in English, they are not as simple in expression as in English. The reason for these differences may be that Chinese is a highly analytical language. Through the study of the monotone features of Chinese qualified classifiers, we obtain some semantic universality and differences of monotone classifiers, thus deepening the existing understanding. At the same time, because the limited quantitative words are inexhaustible in theory, and we are discussing some typical classifiers in Chinese, this study has caused shortcomings. We look forward to further research to deepen the formal semantic processing of natural language.
【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】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：H146

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張喬;廣義量詞理論及其對(duì)模糊量詞的應(yīng)用[J];當(dāng)代語(yǔ)言學(xué);1998年02期

2 蔡維天;;談“有人”“有的人”和“有些人”[J];漢語(yǔ)學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期

3 劉偉;廣義量詞理論中的單調(diào)性研究[J];外語(yǔ)學(xué)刊;2002年01期

4 丁國(guó)旗;廣義量詞及其單調(diào)性[J];山東外語(yǔ)教學(xué);2001年03期

5 伍雅清;楊稼輝;;量化名詞的兩種形式——談“所有NP”和“所有的NP”[J];外國(guó)語(yǔ)(上海外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2011年01期

本文編號(hào)：2480619