情景与一般的偶然性和名词

IF 0.5 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Meng-Chen Lee, W. Abraham
{"title":"情景与一般的偶然性和名词","authors":"Meng-Chen Lee, W. Abraham","doi":"10.1515/stuf-2020-1016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper proposes an analysis of the DP structure of Chinese in comparison with German and other West Germanic languages, particularly English. The analysis is linked to sentence structure, particularly event structure of the respective languages and the relation between nominal classifiers and sentential tense. Chinese is a language without nominal declension; German is not as other Indo-European languages. Among the inflectional paradigms, German has retained from earlier periods, and developed further, the coding of topicality in terms of familiarity and anaphoricity. While Chinese shares with German clause syntactic topicality, it does so purely in terms of clause-early and clause-late word order. German, by contrast, involves specific positions in the serial middle field to code referential familiarity, anaphoricity, and, above all, weak versus strong referential weight to distinguish, among other functions, specific versus unspecific reference. The categories involved in coding such properties in German are determiners and the declensional morphology of attributes (‘strong’ versus ‘weak’ inflection providing specific reference). This paper investigates the regularities of weak and strong reference in Chinese. The discussion yields insight into the structural coding that Chinese provides instead of what is encoded in German in morphological terms on adjectival attributes and in terms determiners ((in)definite articles and bare nouns). In the course, the discussion around mass versus count nouns and the role of classifiers is brought up and newly evaluated on the basis of the new referential distinctions.","PeriodicalId":43533,"journal":{"name":"STUF-Language Typology and Universals","volume":"36 1","pages":"441 - 482"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Episodic versus generic eventualities and nominals\",\"authors\":\"Meng-Chen Lee, W. Abraham\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/stuf-2020-1016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper proposes an analysis of the DP structure of Chinese in comparison with German and other West Germanic languages, particularly English. The analysis is linked to sentence structure, particularly event structure of the respective languages and the relation between nominal classifiers and sentential tense. Chinese is a language without nominal declension; German is not as other Indo-European languages. Among the inflectional paradigms, German has retained from earlier periods, and developed further, the coding of topicality in terms of familiarity and anaphoricity. While Chinese shares with German clause syntactic topicality, it does so purely in terms of clause-early and clause-late word order. German, by contrast, involves specific positions in the serial middle field to code referential familiarity, anaphoricity, and, above all, weak versus strong referential weight to distinguish, among other functions, specific versus unspecific reference. The categories involved in coding such properties in German are determiners and the declensional morphology of attributes (‘strong’ versus ‘weak’ inflection providing specific reference). This paper investigates the regularities of weak and strong reference in Chinese. The discussion yields insight into the structural coding that Chinese provides instead of what is encoded in German in morphological terms on adjectival attributes and in terms determiners ((in)definite articles and bare nouns). In the course, the discussion around mass versus count nouns and the role of classifiers is brought up and newly evaluated on the basis of the new referential distinctions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"STUF-Language Typology and Universals\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"441 - 482\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"STUF-Language Typology and Universals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2020-1016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"STUF-Language Typology and Universals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2020-1016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

摘要本文通过与德语和其他西日耳曼语言,特别是英语的比较,分析了汉语的DP结构。该分析与句子结构有关,特别是与各自语言的事件结构以及名词性分类词与句子时态的关系有关。汉语是一种没有词性变音的语言;德语不像其他印欧语言。在屈折变体范式中,德语保留了较早时期的话题性编码,并进一步发展了熟悉性和回指性。汉语句式的话题性与德语句式的话题性相同,但仅表现在句式的前、后语序上。相比之下,德语涉及到序列中间字段中的特定位置,以编码参考熟悉度,回指,最重要的是,弱与强参考权重,以区分其他功能,具体与非具体参考。在德语中编码这些属性所涉及的类别是限定词和属性的衰落形态(“强”与“弱”屈折提供特定的参考)。本文考察了汉语弱指称和强指称的规律。通过对汉语结构编码的探讨,我们了解到汉语所提供的结构编码,而不是德语所提供的形容词定语和限定词(定冠词和裸名词)的形态编码。在这门课程中,我们提出了关于质量名词和计数名词以及分类器作用的讨论,并在新的指称区别的基础上对其进行了新的评价。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Episodic versus generic eventualities and nominals
Abstract This paper proposes an analysis of the DP structure of Chinese in comparison with German and other West Germanic languages, particularly English. The analysis is linked to sentence structure, particularly event structure of the respective languages and the relation between nominal classifiers and sentential tense. Chinese is a language without nominal declension; German is not as other Indo-European languages. Among the inflectional paradigms, German has retained from earlier periods, and developed further, the coding of topicality in terms of familiarity and anaphoricity. While Chinese shares with German clause syntactic topicality, it does so purely in terms of clause-early and clause-late word order. German, by contrast, involves specific positions in the serial middle field to code referential familiarity, anaphoricity, and, above all, weak versus strong referential weight to distinguish, among other functions, specific versus unspecific reference. The categories involved in coding such properties in German are determiners and the declensional morphology of attributes (‘strong’ versus ‘weak’ inflection providing specific reference). This paper investigates the regularities of weak and strong reference in Chinese. The discussion yields insight into the structural coding that Chinese provides instead of what is encoded in German in morphological terms on adjectival attributes and in terms determiners ((in)definite articles and bare nouns). In the course, the discussion around mass versus count nouns and the role of classifiers is brought up and newly evaluated on the basis of the new referential distinctions.
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
STUF-Language Typology and Universals
STUF-Language Typology and Universals LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
×
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