语义异常、语用错误和语法错误

IF 3 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Márta Abrusán
{"title":"语义异常、语用错误和语法错误","authors":"Márta Abrusán","doi":"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011938","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A major goal of modern syntax has been to find principles that rule out sentences that seem ungrammatical. To achieve this goal, it has been proposed that syntactically odd (or ungrammatical) sentences can be distinguished empirically and theoretically from semantically odd (or semantically anomalous) sentences. However, sometimes it is not clear why a sentence is “weird,” which has repercussions for our syntactic and semantic theories. According to a number of proposals, semantic and pragmatic processes can lead to weirdness that empirically feels more like ungrammaticality than semantic oddness. But if this is so, then a question arises: What explains the intuitive difference between sentences that feel ungrammatical and those that merely feel semantically (or pragmatically) anomalous? This article addresses this question by describing and comparing various semantic and pragmatic proposals for explaining different types of weirdness: ungrammaticality, semantic anomaly, and pragmatic infelicity.","PeriodicalId":45803,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Semantic Anomaly, Pragmatic Infelicity, and Ungrammaticality\",\"authors\":\"Márta Abrusán\",\"doi\":\"10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011938\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A major goal of modern syntax has been to find principles that rule out sentences that seem ungrammatical. To achieve this goal, it has been proposed that syntactically odd (or ungrammatical) sentences can be distinguished empirically and theoretically from semantically odd (or semantically anomalous) sentences. However, sometimes it is not clear why a sentence is “weird,” which has repercussions for our syntactic and semantic theories. According to a number of proposals, semantic and pragmatic processes can lead to weirdness that empirically feels more like ungrammaticality than semantic oddness. But if this is so, then a question arises: What explains the intuitive difference between sentences that feel ungrammatical and those that merely feel semantically (or pragmatically) anomalous? This article addresses this question by describing and comparing various semantic and pragmatic proposals for explaining different types of weirdness: ungrammaticality, semantic anomaly, and pragmatic infelicity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45803,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual Review of Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual Review of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011938\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Annual Review of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-LINGUISTICS-011718-011938","RegionNum":1,"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: 11

摘要

现代语法的一个主要目标是找到排除看似不合语法的句子的原则。为了实现这一目标,有人提出可以从经验和理论上区分语法奇数(或不合语法)的句子和语义奇数(或语义异常)的句子。然而,有时我们并不清楚为什么一个句子是“奇怪的”,这对我们的句法和语义理论产生了影响。根据许多建议,语义和语用过程可能导致奇怪,经验上感觉更像是不符合语法,而不是语义上的奇怪。但如果是这样的话,那么一个问题就出现了:如何解释那些感觉不合语法的句子和那些仅仅感觉语义(或语用)异常的句子之间的直观差异?本文通过描述和比较不同的语义和语用建议来解决这个问题,这些建议解释了不同类型的怪异:不符合语法、语义异常和语用错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Semantic Anomaly, Pragmatic Infelicity, and Ungrammaticality
A major goal of modern syntax has been to find principles that rule out sentences that seem ungrammatical. To achieve this goal, it has been proposed that syntactically odd (or ungrammatical) sentences can be distinguished empirically and theoretically from semantically odd (or semantically anomalous) sentences. However, sometimes it is not clear why a sentence is “weird,” which has repercussions for our syntactic and semantic theories. According to a number of proposals, semantic and pragmatic processes can lead to weirdness that empirically feels more like ungrammaticality than semantic oddness. But if this is so, then a question arises: What explains the intuitive difference between sentences that feel ungrammatical and those that merely feel semantically (or pragmatically) anomalous? This article addresses this question by describing and comparing various semantic and pragmatic proposals for explaining different types of weirdness: ungrammaticality, semantic anomaly, and pragmatic infelicity.
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
7.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: The Annual Review of Linguistics, in publication since 2015, covers significant developments in the field of linguistics, including phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and their interfaces. Reviews synthesize advances in linguistic theory, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics, language change, biology and evolution of language, typology, as well as applications of linguistics in many domains.
×
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