传统的素质观念与现代的素质观

Albana Deda, Leonora Lumezi
{"title":"传统的素质观念与现代的素质观","authors":"Albana Deda, Leonora Lumezi","doi":"10.26417/EJLS.V1I1.P81-88","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the antiquity, diathesis has been analyzed in linguistic theories as a morphological category of the verb. Consulting the earliest papers, there could be noticed that Greek tradition makes mention of active, passive and middle verbs, whereas in Latin papers we find active and passive verb forms. (There must be said that during this linguistic period the term diathesis could hardly be found. The above mentioned terms referred to the classification of verbs). During the Medieval Age linguists defined the same concept of diathesis. Most of the traditional grammars of many contemporary languages hold the same view, without any significant differences. In traditional Albanian papers diathesis or voice is defined as a morphological category that expresses relations between the verb (the traditional predicate) and the subject. There has been made a division between active and non-active voice. Non-active voice verbs are further divided into: passive, reflexive and middle voice. Empirical studies show that it is difficult to make a distinct and final classification of verbs in terms of the different patterns in which it can be found. This inference is made taking into consideration abundant examples from the Albanian corpus, showing that a verb can be used intransitively in some patterns and transitively in others. The voice division of verbs provided by the Albanian grammars reveals a gap in the examination of the formal and especially the semantic aspect. There are many semantic and formal arguments that lead us to the conclusion that the traditional definition of diathesis is problematic. In our view, this process should be treated as a wider phenomenon that includes more than the morphological aspect. The Valency Theory could be an alternative approach that provides a better solution to this problem.","PeriodicalId":350970,"journal":{"name":"EJLS European Journal of Language and Literature Studies Articles","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Traditional Conception of Diathesis (Voice) and a Modern View to It\",\"authors\":\"Albana Deda, Leonora Lumezi\",\"doi\":\"10.26417/EJLS.V1I1.P81-88\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the antiquity, diathesis has been analyzed in linguistic theories as a morphological category of the verb. Consulting the earliest papers, there could be noticed that Greek tradition makes mention of active, passive and middle verbs, whereas in Latin papers we find active and passive verb forms. (There must be said that during this linguistic period the term diathesis could hardly be found. The above mentioned terms referred to the classification of verbs). During the Medieval Age linguists defined the same concept of diathesis. Most of the traditional grammars of many contemporary languages hold the same view, without any significant differences. In traditional Albanian papers diathesis or voice is defined as a morphological category that expresses relations between the verb (the traditional predicate) and the subject. There has been made a division between active and non-active voice. Non-active voice verbs are further divided into: passive, reflexive and middle voice. Empirical studies show that it is difficult to make a distinct and final classification of verbs in terms of the different patterns in which it can be found. This inference is made taking into consideration abundant examples from the Albanian corpus, showing that a verb can be used intransitively in some patterns and transitively in others. The voice division of verbs provided by the Albanian grammars reveals a gap in the examination of the formal and especially the semantic aspect. There are many semantic and formal arguments that lead us to the conclusion that the traditional definition of diathesis is problematic. In our view, this process should be treated as a wider phenomenon that includes more than the morphological aspect. The Valency Theory could be an alternative approach that provides a better solution to this problem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":350970,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EJLS European Journal of Language and Literature Studies Articles\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EJLS European Journal of Language and Literature Studies Articles\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26417/EJLS.V1I1.P81-88\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJLS European Journal of Language and Literature Studies Articles","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26417/EJLS.V1I1.P81-88","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

自古以来,语言学理论就把素质作为动词的一个形态范畴来分析。查阅最早的论文,可以注意到希腊传统提到主动、被动和中间动词,而在拉丁语论文中,我们发现主动和被动动词的形式。(必须指出,在这一语言学时期,“素质”一词几乎找不到。上述术语指的是动词的分类)。在中世纪,语言学家定义了同样的素质概念。许多现代语言的传统语法大多持有相同的观点,没有明显的差异。在传统的阿尔巴尼亚语论文中,素质或语态被定义为表达动词(传统的谓语)和主语之间关系的形态范畴。主动语态和非主动语态是有区别的。非主动语态又分为被动语态、反身语态和中间语态。实证研究表明,很难根据动词出现的不同模式对其进行明确的最终分类。这一推论是考虑到阿尔巴尼亚语料库中的大量例子,表明一个动词可以在某些模式中用作不及物动词,在其他模式中用作及物动词。阿尔巴尼亚语法学提供的动词的语态划分揭示了在形式方面,特别是语义方面的检查的差距。有许多语义和形式的论证,使我们得出这样的结论:传统的素质定义是有问题的。在我们看来,这一过程应被视为一个更广泛的现象,包括更多的形态方面。价理论可能是另一种方法,为这个问题提供了更好的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Traditional Conception of Diathesis (Voice) and a Modern View to It
Since the antiquity, diathesis has been analyzed in linguistic theories as a morphological category of the verb. Consulting the earliest papers, there could be noticed that Greek tradition makes mention of active, passive and middle verbs, whereas in Latin papers we find active and passive verb forms. (There must be said that during this linguistic period the term diathesis could hardly be found. The above mentioned terms referred to the classification of verbs). During the Medieval Age linguists defined the same concept of diathesis. Most of the traditional grammars of many contemporary languages hold the same view, without any significant differences. In traditional Albanian papers diathesis or voice is defined as a morphological category that expresses relations between the verb (the traditional predicate) and the subject. There has been made a division between active and non-active voice. Non-active voice verbs are further divided into: passive, reflexive and middle voice. Empirical studies show that it is difficult to make a distinct and final classification of verbs in terms of the different patterns in which it can be found. This inference is made taking into consideration abundant examples from the Albanian corpus, showing that a verb can be used intransitively in some patterns and transitively in others. The voice division of verbs provided by the Albanian grammars reveals a gap in the examination of the formal and especially the semantic aspect. There are many semantic and formal arguments that lead us to the conclusion that the traditional definition of diathesis is problematic. In our view, this process should be treated as a wider phenomenon that includes more than the morphological aspect. The Valency Theory could be an alternative approach that provides a better solution to this problem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信