汉语形容词的句法来源

Q3 Arts and Humanities
Feng-hsi Liu
{"title":"汉语形容词的句法来源","authors":"Feng-hsi Liu","doi":"10.1515/scl-2016-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Cinque (2010, 2014) shows that in English and Italian, adjectives have two syntactic sources, each with different interpretive properties; one source corresponding to predicative adjectives; the other to non-predicative adjectives. This study examines adjectives in Mandarin Chinese with the goal of finding out whether Chinese displays the same pattern. The data shows that Chinese behaves similarly to English and Italian; adjectives that are derived from relative clauses are semantically different from those that directly modify nouns. In addition, Chinese displays the correspondence that predicative adjectives are derived from reduced RC, while nonpredicative adjectives participate in direct modification. However, this parallelism is only possible if we modify the line drawn between “predicative” and “nonpredicative” assumed by Chinese grammarians. 提要 Cinque (2010, 2014) 認為作定語的形容詞有兩個句法來源,並為英語和義大利語提 供證據指出不同來源之形容詞帶有不同的語義,句法來源的不同最終歸究於形容詞 是否用作謂語。本文探討漢語形容詞的句法來源,證據顯示漢語形容詞同樣有兩個 來源:直接修飾以及關係小句,前者與後者顯現不同語義。形容詞是否用作謂語在 漢語也發揮同樣作用,對形容詞的句法來源有決定性因素。但漢語和英語,義大利 語的相似之處只有在以下情況才能呈現出來:漢語“謂語性形容詞”與“非謂語性 形容詞”的區分必須重新規劃,所有不加“的”的形名詞組中的形容詞皆應納入非 謂語性形容詞中。","PeriodicalId":52094,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Chinese Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Syntactic Sources of Adjectives in Mandarin Chinese\",\"authors\":\"Feng-hsi Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/scl-2016-0002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Cinque (2010, 2014) shows that in English and Italian, adjectives have two syntactic sources, each with different interpretive properties; one source corresponding to predicative adjectives; the other to non-predicative adjectives. This study examines adjectives in Mandarin Chinese with the goal of finding out whether Chinese displays the same pattern. The data shows that Chinese behaves similarly to English and Italian; adjectives that are derived from relative clauses are semantically different from those that directly modify nouns. In addition, Chinese displays the correspondence that predicative adjectives are derived from reduced RC, while nonpredicative adjectives participate in direct modification. However, this parallelism is only possible if we modify the line drawn between “predicative” and “nonpredicative” assumed by Chinese grammarians. 提要 Cinque (2010, 2014) 認為作定語的形容詞有兩個句法來源,並為英語和義大利語提 供證據指出不同來源之形容詞帶有不同的語義,句法來源的不同最終歸究於形容詞 是否用作謂語。本文探討漢語形容詞的句法來源,證據顯示漢語形容詞同樣有兩個 來源:直接修飾以及關係小句,前者與後者顯現不同語義。形容詞是否用作謂語在 漢語也發揮同樣作用,對形容詞的句法來源有決定性因素。但漢語和英語,義大利 語的相似之處只有在以下情況才能呈現出來:漢語“謂語性形容詞”與“非謂語性 形容詞”的區分必須重新規劃,所有不加“的”的形名詞組中的形容詞皆應納入非 謂語性形容詞中。\",\"PeriodicalId\":52094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Chinese Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Chinese Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/scl-2016-0002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Chinese Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/scl-2016-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

Cinque(2010, 2014)研究表明,英语和意大利语中,形容词有两种句法来源,各有不同的解释性质;与谓语形容词相对应的一个词源;另一个是非谓语形容词。本研究考察了普通话中的形容词,目的是找出汉语是否表现出同样的模式。数据显示,汉语的行为与英语和意大利语相似;从关系从句派生出来的形容词在语义上与直接修饰名词的形容词不同。此外,汉语表现出谓语形容词由还原后的RC衍生而来的对应关系,而非谓语形容词则参与直接修饰。然而,只有当我们修改中国语法学家所假设的“谓语”和“非谓语”之间的界限时,这种平行才有可能。提要五(2010、2014)認為作定語的形容詞有兩個句法來源,並為英語和義大利語提供證據指出不同來源之形容詞帶有不同的語義,句法來源的不同最終歸究於形容詞是否用作謂語。本文探討漢語形容詞的句法來源,證據顯示漢語形容詞同樣有兩個 來源:直接修飾以及關係小句,前者與後者顯現不同語義。形容詞是否用作謂語在 漢語也發揮同樣作用,對形容詞的句法來源有決定性因素。但漢語和英語,義大利 語的相似之處只有在以下情況才能呈現出來:漢語“謂語性形容詞”與“非謂語性 形容詞”的區分必須重新規劃,所有不加“的”的形名詞組中的形容詞皆應納入非 謂語性形容詞中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Syntactic Sources of Adjectives in Mandarin Chinese
Abstract Cinque (2010, 2014) shows that in English and Italian, adjectives have two syntactic sources, each with different interpretive properties; one source corresponding to predicative adjectives; the other to non-predicative adjectives. This study examines adjectives in Mandarin Chinese with the goal of finding out whether Chinese displays the same pattern. The data shows that Chinese behaves similarly to English and Italian; adjectives that are derived from relative clauses are semantically different from those that directly modify nouns. In addition, Chinese displays the correspondence that predicative adjectives are derived from reduced RC, while nonpredicative adjectives participate in direct modification. However, this parallelism is only possible if we modify the line drawn between “predicative” and “nonpredicative” assumed by Chinese grammarians. 提要 Cinque (2010, 2014) 認為作定語的形容詞有兩個句法來源,並為英語和義大利語提 供證據指出不同來源之形容詞帶有不同的語義,句法來源的不同最終歸究於形容詞 是否用作謂語。本文探討漢語形容詞的句法來源,證據顯示漢語形容詞同樣有兩個 來源:直接修飾以及關係小句,前者與後者顯現不同語義。形容詞是否用作謂語在 漢語也發揮同樣作用,對形容詞的句法來源有決定性因素。但漢語和英語,義大利 語的相似之處只有在以下情況才能呈現出來:漢語“謂語性形容詞”與“非謂語性 形容詞”的區分必須重新規劃,所有不加“的”的形名詞組中的形容詞皆應納入非 謂語性形容詞中。
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
Studies in Chinese Linguistics
Studies in Chinese Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
46 weeks
期刊介绍: STUDIES IN CHINESE LINGUISTICS is an international academic journal devoted to comparative study of Chinese language and linguistics and a platform for research of comparative linguistics and dialectal grammar under a comparative approach. We especially welcome synchronic or diachronic comparative works on any aspects of the syntax, semantics, and morphology among Chinese dialects or between a Chinese language/dialect and any languages that contribute to theoretical linguistics or have significant theoretical implications. The journal does not have article processing charges (APCs) nor article submission charges.
×
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