肯定和否定在时间上不对称

IF 0.5 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Matti Miestamo, Olli O. Silvennoinen, C. Yurayong
{"title":"肯定和否定在时间上不对称","authors":"Matti Miestamo, Olli O. Silvennoinen, C. Yurayong","doi":"10.1075/sl.23036.mie","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n One cross-linguistically recurrent asymmetry between affirmation and negation is the neutralization of\n tense-aspect distinctions in negatives. A functional explanation proposed for this is that in their typical discourse context\n negatives have less need for temporal specification than affirmatives and in some languages this discourse preference is reflected\n as fewer tense-aspect distinctions in grammar. To examine whether such a discourse preference exists, we compare the use of\n temporal adverbials in affirmatives and negatives in English, Finnish and Korean corpus data. The results provide qualified\n support for the hypothesized discourse preference: in English and Korean, affirmatives are likelier to have temporal adverbials\n than negatives, but Finnish shows no statistically significant difference. In English and Finnish, affirmatives are likelier than\n negatives to contain adjuncts indicating temporal position. Verb semantics is found to interact with temporal specifications. The\n study also uncovers further differences between affirmatives and negatives in the use of adverbials.","PeriodicalId":46377,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Language","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Asymmetry in temporal specification between affirmation and negation\",\"authors\":\"Matti Miestamo, Olli O. Silvennoinen, C. Yurayong\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/sl.23036.mie\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n One cross-linguistically recurrent asymmetry between affirmation and negation is the neutralization of\\n tense-aspect distinctions in negatives. A functional explanation proposed for this is that in their typical discourse context\\n negatives have less need for temporal specification than affirmatives and in some languages this discourse preference is reflected\\n as fewer tense-aspect distinctions in grammar. To examine whether such a discourse preference exists, we compare the use of\\n temporal adverbials in affirmatives and negatives in English, Finnish and Korean corpus data. The results provide qualified\\n support for the hypothesized discourse preference: in English and Korean, affirmatives are likelier to have temporal adverbials\\n than negatives, but Finnish shows no statistically significant difference. In English and Finnish, affirmatives are likelier than\\n negatives to contain adjuncts indicating temporal position. Verb semantics is found to interact with temporal specifications. The\\n study also uncovers further differences between affirmatives and negatives in the use of adverbials.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Language\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23036.mie\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23036.mie","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在跨语言中,肯定和否定之间经常出现的一种不对称现象是否定句中时态方面的区别被中和了。对此提出的一个功能性解释是,在典型的话语语境中,否定句比肯定句更不需要时间上的规定,在某些语言中,这种话语偏好反映为语法中时态方面的区别更少。为了考察这种话语偏好是否存在,我们比较了英语、芬兰语和韩语语料库中肯定句和否定句中时间副词的使用情况。结果为假设的话语偏好提供了有条件的支持:在英语和韩语中,肯定句比否定句更倾向于使用时间副词,但芬兰语在统计上没有显著差异。在英语和芬兰语中,肯定句比否定句更容易包含表示时间位置的副词。研究发现,动词语义与时间规范之间存在相互作用。研究还发现了肯定句和否定句在使用副词方面的进一步差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Asymmetry in temporal specification between affirmation and negation
One cross-linguistically recurrent asymmetry between affirmation and negation is the neutralization of tense-aspect distinctions in negatives. A functional explanation proposed for this is that in their typical discourse context negatives have less need for temporal specification than affirmatives and in some languages this discourse preference is reflected as fewer tense-aspect distinctions in grammar. To examine whether such a discourse preference exists, we compare the use of temporal adverbials in affirmatives and negatives in English, Finnish and Korean corpus data. The results provide qualified support for the hypothesized discourse preference: in English and Korean, affirmatives are likelier to have temporal adverbials than negatives, but Finnish shows no statistically significant difference. In English and Finnish, affirmatives are likelier than negatives to contain adjuncts indicating temporal position. Verb semantics is found to interact with temporal specifications. The study also uncovers further differences between affirmatives and negatives in the use of adverbials.
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Studies in Language provides a forum for the discussion of issues in contemporary linguistics from discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological perspectives. Areas of central concern are: discourse grammar; syntactic, morphological and semantic universals; pragmatics; grammaticalization and grammaticalization theory; and the description of problems in individual languages from a discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological perspective. Special emphasis is placed on works which contribute to the development of discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological theory and which explore the application of empirical methodology to the analysis of grammar.
×
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