本文選題：句末助詞 + “尾蓋尾制限”原則�。� 參考：《上海外國(guó)語大學(xué)》2017年博士論文

【摘要】：任何句法成分的分析都不能脫離其自身所在的句法環(huán)境,脫離句法環(huán)境只單純對(duì)句末助詞(Sentence Final Particles,簡(jiǎn)稱SFP)進(jìn)行分析必然導(dǎo)致窺一斑而不見全身。在形式句法系統(tǒng)的視閾下,句末助詞是個(gè)麻煩制造者,其線性位置上的居后與句法結(jié)構(gòu)上的高層節(jié)點(diǎn)構(gòu)成抵牾。語法學(xué)家必須對(duì)其CP核心的句法位置作出合理解釋。移位還是合并?移位的動(dòng)機(jī)又是什么?具體到現(xiàn)代漢語的句末助詞“了”,無論是根據(jù)朱德熙(1982),還是Paul(2005,2015)的排序,句末助詞“了”都是位列語氣助詞或者句末助詞大家庭的第一序位。因此,句末助詞“了”的句法位置成為整個(gè)句末助詞與語序研究的核心。這種核心地位在Biberauer,HolmbergRobert(2007,2014)所提出的“尾蓋尾制限”(Final-Over-Final Constraint)原則下尤為突出。但在以往研究中,很少有將語序和句末助詞“了”進(jìn)行同步考察。這里的語序問題并非類型學(xué)意義上的SVO或者SOV等三個(gè)句法實(shí)體的組配順序(金立鑫2012),而是形式句法上CP核心和TP的語序問題,簡(jiǎn)而言之,就是C-TP還是TPC的語序問題。當(dāng)然,這里的C核心包括但不僅限于傳統(tǒng)的標(biāo)句詞(Complementizer)“that”或者“for”,因此,現(xiàn)代漢語的句末助詞“呢、嗎、吧、啊、嘔”等都屬于廣義的C核心(Tang 1998)。那么句末助詞“了”是不是CP核心?很少有文獻(xiàn)明確探討這個(gè)問題�；谝陨戏治龊涂剂�,本文對(duì)句末助詞“了”的句法語義屬性及其對(duì)語序影響的研究主要包括以下五個(gè)方面:一、“尾蓋尾制限”原則對(duì)漢語語序的解釋力。在句法結(jié)構(gòu)推導(dǎo)和大規(guī)模語序統(tǒng)計(jì)的基礎(chǔ)上,Biberauer,HolmbergRoberts(2007,2014)提出了具有形式類型學(xué)意義的FOFC制限原則。該原則認(rèn)為同一語類([+V]或者[+N])擴(kuò)展的句法結(jié)構(gòu)具有語序上的同一性。但漢語等東亞及東南亞語言中大量存在的句末助詞對(duì)FOFC制限原則構(gòu)成了理論上的挑戰(zhàn)。因此,在FOFC制限原則下考察現(xiàn)代漢語的句末助詞有助于我們進(jìn)一步認(rèn)清句末助詞的句法語義屬性,有助于判定它們的句法類別。也正因?yàn)樵跈z驗(yàn)FOFC制限原則對(duì)現(xiàn)代漢語適用性過程中,本文的研究問題和研究核心才得以突顯。二、句末助詞“了”體現(xiàn)話主在所述事件中的顯身。既然在現(xiàn)有句法框架下,句末助詞“了”成為FOFC制限原則普遍性的絆腳石,那么就必須對(duì)句末助詞“了”的句法語義屬性作詳細(xì)的梳理。以往對(duì)句末助詞“了”的研究大都集中在“完成體”、“起始體”、“過去時(shí)”等時(shí)體范疇以及話主的立場(chǎng)、態(tài)度等主觀性范疇。這明顯反映出研究者對(duì)“了”理解上的偏差,但如果統(tǒng)一來看,這種偏差又都能集中到一個(gè)話語事件(speech event)中來�！巴瓿审w”、“起始體”等時(shí)體的意義是圍繞著話主的說話時(shí)間點(diǎn)來解讀的,而話主的立場(chǎng)、態(tài)度等又都是圍繞著話主在所述事件中的主觀介入來解讀。話主的說話時(shí)間和話主的主觀介入在很大程度上就是話主在所述事件中的顯身,本文試圖通過話主顯身這個(gè)概念將“了”與事件時(shí)間和主觀立場(chǎng)等意義聯(lián)結(jié)起來,進(jìn)行統(tǒng)一解釋。三、句末助詞“了”的語法化。任何助詞的形成都經(jīng)歷了漫長(zhǎng)的語法化過程,句末助詞“了”也當(dāng)如此。那么句末助詞“了”所表現(xiàn)的話主顯身的意義是如何演變而來的?通常認(rèn)為,句末助詞“了”和詞尾“了”同源,都與事件時(shí)間相關(guān)。然而,從歷時(shí)的語料來看,“了”在魏晉南北朝時(shí)期是表示“完結(jié)”義的動(dòng)詞,后來逐漸演變?yōu)槭录涞耐杲Y(jié)動(dòng)詞,居于句末。這是兩個(gè)不同的事件。通過重新分析機(jī)制,“了”進(jìn)一步語法化并融入其前的事件句中。在北宋時(shí)期,“了”和句末助詞“也”合并,形成了現(xiàn)代意義上的句末助詞“了”,這也是句末助詞“了”具有時(shí)體意義和話主主觀態(tài)度等雙重意義的來源。四、句末助詞“了”在句法上是限定性(finiteness)標(biāo)記。當(dāng)句末助詞“了”的語義確定以后,其在句法結(jié)構(gòu)上的位置必然成為研究的核心。那么如何確定句末助詞“了”的句法位置?現(xiàn)代漢語是否如印歐語言一樣具有限定范疇一直是個(gè)爭(zhēng)論的話題。目前文獻(xiàn)的爭(zhēng)論主要還是集中在動(dòng)詞的屈折形態(tài)的有無上,這應(yīng)該與當(dāng)下限定性概念稍有差距。隨著句法研究的深入,限定性不再局限于動(dòng)詞的時(shí)態(tài)或者一致的形態(tài)屈折,而是與體現(xiàn)說話事件的CP句法層直接相關(guān)。游離在時(shí)間軸上的事件獲得來自話主說話時(shí)間定位的句子為限定小句,反之則為非限定小句。限定小句的限定性可以以其他形式體現(xiàn)出來,而不僅僅體現(xiàn)在動(dòng)詞形態(tài)上。因此限定小句不僅僅是語義上的概念,而是實(shí)實(shí)在在的句法范疇,有著專屬于限定范疇的句法體現(xiàn)。句末助詞“了”作為說話事件中的話主顯身的語法標(biāo)記,與限定性概念相吻合,這確立了句末助詞“了”作為限定核心之一的句法語義基礎(chǔ)。從而在句法結(jié)構(gòu)上奠定了句末助詞“了”的FinP核心地位。五、Fin核心的語類(category)歸屬。既然句末助詞“了”是Fin核心,屬于CP層的句法范疇,那在句法推導(dǎo)過程中,限定核心“了”是移位還是合并而成的?限定核心和TP,vP,VP等核心同源嗎,都屬于[+V]的擴(kuò)展投射嗎?印歐語言與語氣、句子類型等有關(guān)的CP層大都以動(dòng)詞的屈折形態(tài)來體現(xiàn),德語就有V2現(xiàn)象,英語也有疑問詞移位現(xiàn)象,當(dāng)然這種句法結(jié)構(gòu)的變化都與TP層向CP層的T-to-C提升移位有關(guān)。但現(xiàn)代漢語的CP層的語義或者形態(tài)體現(xiàn)與印歐語言并不相同,漢語沒有疑問詞移位,而是采用句末助詞合并的形式來標(biāo)識(shí)分屬不同CP概念的句法結(jié)構(gòu)。因此,傳統(tǒng)根據(jù)印歐語言所認(rèn)定的CP核心屬于[+V]投射的認(rèn)識(shí)必須重新認(rèn)定。本文將根據(jù)句末助詞所體現(xiàn)的句法語義屬性來判定漢語的CP層既不屬于[+V]也不屬于[+N]的擴(kuò)展投射。而是語言外體現(xiàn)話主主觀顯身的[-V,-N]成分。因此句末助詞與FOFC的抵牾問題將不再是句法理論的難題,句末助詞不是人類認(rèn)知上的另類。
[Abstract]:The analysis of any syntactic component can not be separated from its own syntactic environment, and the analysis of the Sentence Final Particles (SFP) from the syntactic environment will inevitably lead to a glimpse of the whole body. In the visual threshold of the formal syntactic system, the end of the sentence is a troublemaker, and its linear position is in the post and The syntactic structure of the high-level nodes constitutes a contradiction. The grammer must make a reasonable explanation of the syntactic position of its CP core. What is the shift or merger? What is the motive of the shift? Concrete to the end of the sentence in modern Chinese, whether according to Zhu Dexi (1982) or the order of Paul (20052015), the end of the sentence is the list. Therefore, the syntactic position of the end of the sentence is the core of the study of the final word and word order of the end of the sentence. This core position is particularly prominent under the principle of "tail cap tail system limit" (Final-Over-Final Constraint) proposed by Biberauer, HolmbergRobert (20072014). In the study, there is little to synchronize the word order and the end of the sentence. The word order problem is not the order of three syntactic entities, such as SVO or SOV in the typology (Jin Lixin 2012), but the word order of the CP core and TP in the form of syntax, in short, the word order of C-TP or TPC. Of course, C here. The core includes but not limited to the traditional Complementizer "that" or "for". Therefore, the end of the sentence of modern Chinese, "does it, bar, ah, nausea" and so on belong to the generalized C core (Tang 1998). So is the end of the sentence "the" the core of the CP? Few documents explicitly discuss this problem. Based on the above analysis and consideration, The study of the syntactic and semantic attribute of the end of the sentence and its influence on the word order mainly includes the following five aspects: first, the explanatory power of the "tailing tail system limit" principle to the Chinese language order. On the basis of the syntactic structure derivation and the large-scale word order statistics, Biberauer and HolmbergRoberts (20072014) put forward the meaning of formal typology. The principle of the FOFC limitation of meaning. This principle holds that the extended syntactic structure of the same language class ([+V] or [+N]) has the same character in the word order. However, a large number of sentence end words in East and South East Asian languages such as Chinese and other languages constitute a theoretical challenge to the principle of the restriction of the FOFC system. Therefore, it is helpful to examine the end of sentence in modern Chinese under the principle of FOFC restriction. We further recognize the syntactic and semantic attributes of the end of the sentence, which helps to determine their syntactic categories. It is also because in the test of the applicability of the FOFC limit principle to modern Chinese, the research and the core of this paper can be highlighted. Two, the end of the sentence "is" the embodiment of the speaker in the events described. Under the framework of the law, the end of the sentence "is" a stumbling block to the universality of the principle of FOFC limit. Then it is necessary to make a detailed combing of the syntactic and semantic attributes of the end of the sentence. The previous research on the end of the sentence "the" is mostly focused on the "completion", "starting body", "past tense" and the position of the speaker, and the position of the speaker. The degree of subjectivity, such as degree of subjectivity, clearly reflects the deviation of the researcher's understanding of "the", but if it is unified, the deviation can all be concentrated in a discourse event (speech event). The meaning of the "completion" and "starting body" is interpreted around the point of time of the speaker, and the position of the speaker, the attitude, etc. It is also around the subjective intervention of the speaker in the events described. The time of the speaker and the subjective intervention of the speaker are, to a great extent, the body of the speaker in the events described. This article tries to unite the meaning of "the" and the event time and the subjective standing field through the concept of the Lord of the speaker. Three, The grammaticalization of the end of an auxiliary word "is". The form of any auxiliary word in Chengdu has undergone a long grammaticalization process and the end of the sentence "is". From the diachronic corpus, "the" is a verb "completion" in the period of the Wei, Jin and Northern and Southern Dynasties, and then gradually evolved into a completion verb of the event sentence, which is at the end of the sentence. This is the two different event. By reanalyzing the mechanism, "the" is further grammaticalization and integrated into the former event sentence. In the Northern Song Dynasty, "the" and the sentence. The final auxiliary word "also" is merged to form the modern meaning of the end of the sentence "the", which is also the source of the double meaning of the meaning of the time body and the subjective attitude of the speaker in the end of the sentence. Four, the end of the sentence "the" is a finiteness mark in syntax. The position on the structure must be the core of the study. Then how to determine the syntactic position of the end of the sentence? Whether the modern Chinese is as restricted as the Indo European language has always been a controversial topic. The current debate on the literature is mainly focused on the inflexion of the inflection form of the verb, which should be slightly with the present restrictive concept. With the deepening of the syntactic study, the limitation is no longer limited to the tense of the verb or the conformation of the conformation, but is directly related to the CP syntactic layer that embodies the speaking event. The sentences free on the time axis are limited by the sentence of the time of the speaker, and the other is a non restrictive clause. It can be embodied in other forms, not only in the form of the verb, so the limited clause is not only a semantic concept, but a real syntactic category, with a syntactic representation of a limited category. The end of the sentence "is" as the grammatical mark of the speaker in the speech event, which is consistent with the restrictive concept. This establishes the semantic basis of the sentence of the end of the sentence as one of the core of the sentence. Thus, it lays the core position of the FinP in the syntactic structure. Five, the category belonging to the core of the Fin. Since the end of the sentence is the core of the Fin, it belongs to the syntactic category of the CP layer, which is limited to the core in the process of syntactic derivation. Is it a shift or a merger? Are the core and TP, vP, VP, and other core homology of the [+V], are they all belong to the extended projection of the [+V]? The language and mood of the Indo European language and the sentence types are mostly reflected by the inflection form of the verb, the German has the V2 phenomenon, the English also has the displaced phenomenon of the interrogative words, of course the change of this syntactic structure is of course all the changes of this syntactic structure, of course. The TP layer is related to the shift of T-to-C in the CP layer, but the semantic or morphological representation of the CP layer in modern Chinese is not the same as that of the Indo European language. In Chinese, there is no interrogative word shift, but the form of the combination of the end of sentences is used to identify the syntactic structure of the different CP concepts. Therefore, the traditional root according to the Indo European language is the [+V] projection. It is necessary to reaffirm the understanding of the sentence at the end of the sentence. This paper will determine that the CP layer of the Chinese language is neither a [+V] nor an extended projection of [+N], but a [-V and a -N] component of the subjective body of the language, so the contradiction between the end of the sentence and the FOFC will no longer be a difficult problem in the syntactic theory, and the end of the sentence is a auxiliary word. It is not an alternative to human cognition.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海外國(guó)語大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：H146.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 鄧思穎;;制圖理論與助詞的聯(lián)合結(jié)構(gòu)說[J];語言研究集刊;2016年01期

2 鄧思穎;;漢語助詞研究的兩個(gè)問題[J];安徽師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年04期

3 鄧思穎;;英語和漢語疑問尾句的句法分析[J];外語教學(xué)與研究;2016年01期

4 王冬梅;姜炫先;;從肯定和敘述的角度看副詞“就、才”和句末“了、的”的共現(xiàn)[J];語言教學(xué)與研究;2015年06期

5 趙春利;孫麗;;句末助詞“吧”的分布驗(yàn)證與語義提取[J];中國(guó)語文;2015年02期

6 沈家煊;;形式類的分與合[J];現(xiàn)代外語;2015年01期

7 鄒海清;;句尾“了”的語法意義[J];樂山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年11期

8 郭杰;;國(guó)外限定與非限定研究的演化與發(fā)展[J];當(dāng)代語言學(xué);2013年03期

9 黃瓚輝;石定栩;;量化事件的“每”結(jié)構(gòu)[J];世界漢語教學(xué);2013年03期

10 朱軍;盧蕓蓉;;從語序問題看語體制約語法的特點(diǎn)[J];新疆社會(huì)科學(xué);2013年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王娟;疑問語氣范疇與漢語疑問句的生成機(jī)制[D];華中師范大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1992870