Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33371
|
Title: | 以詞彙功能語法分析中文的「移位矛盾」 Movement Paradoxes in Mandarin Chinese: A Lexical-Functional Approach |
Authors: | 顏婉玲 Yen,Wan ling |
Contributors: | 何萬順 Her,One soon 顏婉玲 Yen,Wan ling |
Keywords: | 移位矛盾 詞彙功能語法 主題化 階層 Movement paradoxes LFG Topicalization Hierarchy |
Date: | 2007 |
Issue Date: | 2009-09-17 16:24:35 (UTC+8) |
Abstract: | 本論文以「詞彙功能語法」來分析中文「移位矛盾」之現象,以Bresnan (2001)針對英文movement paradoxes以及Huang (1989),Her (1999)針對中文「移位矛盾」之研究為基礎,探討當述語所要求的典型的「名詞組賓語」被禁止出現時,將藉由體現為主題來滿足述語對賓語的要求,但並不是所有詞類的賓語都可以體現為滿足述語要求的主題。因此,本論文將中文中帶有移位矛盾現象的述語分為三大類,蒐集並分析這三大類述語在語料庫中的語料,將得以呈現只有名詞組、動詞組、句子以及帶有引介主題標記的介系詞組可以體現為主題。本論文更進一步為可以體現為主題的詞組建立一個階層,在此階層中位階最高的是名詞組,代表著名詞組在體現為帶有移位矛盾現象的述語之主題時,所受到的限制最小。除此之外,這個階層帶有遞移性,任一詞組若是可以體現為主題,則在階層中位階比該詞組高的詞組,也都可以體現為該述語的主題,反之則不一定成立。 Based on Bresnan’s (2001) study of movement paradoxes in English and Huang’s (1989) and Her’s (1999) studies of movement paradoxes in Mandarin Chinese, this study discusses that when the prototypical NP object required by the predicate is forbidden to map to the OBJ function in the f-structure, this required NP argument must be realized as TOP identified with the missing OBJ to satisfy the Completeness and Coherence Conditions. However, not all category types of phrases can be realized as TOPs. Thus, this study classes the Mandarin Chinese predicates with movement paradoxes into three types; collect and analyze the data in the corpus. The analysis presents that only NP, VP, CP, and PP with topic-introducing marker can be realized as TOPs identified with the missing OBJ. Moreover, this study forms a hierarchy. The NP’s highest status in this hierarchy represents that it is the least restricted category type in being able to be realized as TOP of predicates with movement paradoxes. In addition, if one category type can be realized as TOP of one predicate, other category types with a higher priority can be realized as TOP of that predicate as well, but not vice versa. |
Reference: | Ackerman, F., Moore, J. 2001. A Theory of Argument Structure. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications. Alsina, A. 1992. On the Argument Structure of Causatives. Linguistic Inquiry 23: 517-555. Alsina, A. 1996. The Role of Argument Structure in Grammar: Evidence from Romance. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications. Alsina, A. and S. A. Mchombo. 1993. Object Asymmetries and the Chichewa Applicative Construction. In Sam A. Mchombo (eds.), Theoretical Aspects of Bantu Grammar, 17-45. Standard, Calif.: CSLI Publications. Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, and Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bresnan, J. and L. Moshi. 1990. Object Asymmetries in Comparative Bantu Syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 21: 147-185. Bresnan, J. and A. Zaenen. 1990. Deep Unaccusativity in LFG. In Katarzyna Dziwirek, Patrick Farrell, and Errapel Mejias-Bikandi (eds.), Grammatical Relations: A Cross-Theoretical Perspective, 45-57. Stanford, Calif.: CSLI Publications. Bresnan, J. 1980. Polyadicity: Part I of a Theory of Lexical Rules and Representations. In T. Hoekstra, H. van der Hulst, and M. Moortgat (eds.), Lexical Grammar. Dordrecht: Foris. Bresnan, J.W. 1982. The Passive in Lexical Theory. In Joan W. Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press. Bresnan, J. W. 1989. The Syntactic Projection Problem and the Comparative Syntax of Locative Inversion. Journal of Information Science and Engineering (5): 287-303. Bresnan, J. W. 1991. Locative Case vs. Locative Gender. In the Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley: California, Berkeley Linguistics Society. Bresnan, J. 1998b. Lexical-Functional Syntax. In J. Bresnan and L. Sadler (eds.), Modelling Dynamic Interactions between Morphology and Syntax. Reader of the 10th Euopean Summer School in Logic. Language and Information. Saarbrücken. Bresnan, J. 2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Bresnan, J. and J. M. Kanerva. 1989. Locative Inversion in Chichewa: A Case Study of Factorization in Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 1-50. Bresnan, J. and J.M. Kanerva. 1992. ‘Locative Inversion in Chichewa: A Case Study in Factorization in Grammar’. In Stowell, T. and E. Wehrli (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 26: Syntax and the Lexicon. Academic Press Breul, C. 2001. Movement Paradoxes. Linguist List 12.2826. Butt, M., M. Dalrymple, A. Frank 1997. An Architecture for Linking Theory in LFG, in: M. Butt and T.H. King (eds): Proceedings of the LFG`97 conference, University of California, San Diego, CSLI Online Publications, http://www csli.stanford.edu/publications/. Chao, Y. R. 1968. A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press. Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic Structure. Mouton: The Hague. Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspect of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Chomsky, N. 1977. ‘On Wh-movement’. In Peter Culicover, Ted Wasow & Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal Syntax, 71-132. New York: Academic Press. Chomsky, N. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris. Chomsky, N. 1993. ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’. In Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Cormack, A., and N. Smith, 1997. Checking features and split signs. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 9: 223-252. Dixon, R.M.W. 1982. Where have all the adjectives gone? Mouton Publishers, Berlin. Falk, Y. 2001. Lexical-Functional Grammar: An Introduction to Parallel Constraint-Based Syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Foley, W. A. and R. D. Van Valin. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fox, D. 2002. Antecedent Deletion and The Copy Theory of Movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33(1): 63-96. Gazdar, G., G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag, 1982. Auxiliaries and Related Phenomena in a Restrictive Theory of Grammar. Language (58): 591-638. Givón, T. 1984. Syntax: A Functional-Typological Introduction. Volume I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Goldberg, A. E. 2004. But Do We Need Universal Grammar? A Comment on Lidz et al. 2003, Cognition Goldberg, A. E. 2004. Argument Realization: The Role of Constructions, Lexical Semantics and Discourse Factors. In Jan-Ola Östman and Mirjam Fried (eds.), Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, 17-43. Amsterdam Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Goldberg, A. E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Her, One-Soon. 1991. Topic as a Grammatical Function in Chinese. Lingua 84: 1-23. Her, One-Soon. 1998. Lexical Mapping in Chinese Inversion Constructions. LFG98: International Lexical Functional Grammar Conference. Queensland University, Brisbane, Australia. Her, One-Soon, 1999. Interaction of Thematic Structure and Syntactic Structures: On Mandarin Dative Alternations. Chinese Languages and Linguistics: V, Interaction (中國境內語言暨語言學 第五輯: 語言中的互動), 373-412, Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica Her, One-Soon. 2003. Chinese Inversion Constructions Within a Simplified LMT. In Adams Bodomo and Kang Kwong Luke (eds.), Journal of Chinese Linguistics, Lexical-Functional Grammar Analysis of Chinese, 1-31. Her, One-Soon, 2004. Argument-Function Linking in Resultatives. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 30 (2): 1-34. Her, One-Soon, 2006. Linking Agentive Objects in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at the 2006 Annual Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, July 7-9, 2006, Queensland University. Her, One-Soon, 2007a. Linking Agentive Objects in Mandarin Chinese. In Mary Laughren and Ilana Mushin (eds.), Selected Papers from the 2006 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society. Her, One-Soon. 2007b. Argument-Function Mismatches in Mandarin Chinese: A Lexical Mapping Account. Lingua, 117 (1): 221-246. Huang, Chu-Ren. 1989. Subcategorized Topics in Mandarin Chinese. Paper presented at the 1989 CLTA Annual Meeting, November 17-19, Boston, MA. Huang, Chu-Ren. 1993. Reverse Long-distance Dependency and Functional Uncertainty: The Interpretation of Mandarin Questions. In Chungmin Lee and Boem-mo Kang (eds.), Language, Information, and Computing, 111-120. Seoul, Thaehaksa. Jackendoff, R. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Jacobson, P. 1992. Raising Without Movement. In Richard K. Larson, et al. (eds.), Control and Grammar, 149-194. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Kanerva, J. M. 1989. Focus and phrasing in Chichewa phonology. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University. Kaplan, R. M. and J. Bresnan. 1982. Lexical Functional Grammar: a Formal System for Grammmatical Representation. In J. Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, 173-281. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kim, J. and I. Sag. 1996. French and English negation: A Lexicalist Alternative to Head Movement. Paper presented at the 1996 Bangor Workshop on Syntactic Categories. Kiparsky, P. 1987. Morphology and Grammatical Relations, ms., Stanford University. Krifka, M., F.J. Pelletier, G.N. Carlson, A. ter Meulen, G. Link, and G. Chierchia. 1995. Genericity: An Introduction. In G.N. Carlson and F.J. Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book, 1-124. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1980. Langendoen, D. T. 1970. Essentials of English Grammar. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Levin, B. 1987. The Middle Construction and Ergativity. Lingua 71, 17-31. Li, N. and S. A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press. Manzini, M. R. and A. Rossou. 2000. A Minimalist Theory of A-Movement and Control. Lingua 110: 409-447. Nunberg, D. 1978. The Pragmatics of Reference. Indiana University Linguistic Club. Ostler, N. 1979. Case Linking: A Theory of Case and Verb Diathesis Applied to Classical Sanskrit. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. Rosch, E., C. Mervis, W. Carey, D. Johnson, and P. Boyes-Braem. 1976. Basic Objects in Natural Categories, Cognitive Psychology (8): 382-439. Schneider-Zioga, P. 1996. An Argument in Favor of Agreement Phrase. In Virginia Montapayne and Anthony D. Green (eds.), Proceeding from the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics. Cornell University Shi, Dingxu. 2000. Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language 76, 2:383 – 408. Su, I-Wen. 2002. Why a Construction—That is the Question! Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics 28(2): 27-42. Tsao, Feng-fu. 1987. A Topic-Comment Approach to the Ba Construction. JCL 15.1:1-54. Tsao, Feng-fu. 1990. Sentence and clause structures in Chinese: a functional perspective. Student Book, Co., Taipei. Williams, E. 1994. Thematic Structure in Syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Zhang, N. 2001. Move is Remerge. ZAS-Berlin GLOW in Asia 2002. Zhang, N. 2004. Move is Remerge. Language and Linguistics 5 (1):189-209. 張群. 2007. 華語反覆性事件格式“V+來+V+去”的探索:從格式語法的角度談起/The Iterative Event Construction “V-Lai-V-Qu” in Chinese: A Constructional Approach. 華語文教學期刊第四卷第一期,頁31-53。 |
Description: | 碩士 國立政治大學 語言學研究所 93555001 96 |
Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093555001 |
Data Type: | thesis |
Appears in Collections: | [語言學研究所] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|