Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/33374
|
| Title: | 客語「放」及其同類動詞：框架語義與構式之互動
Piong3 ‘put’ and its Congeners in Hakka: Frames and Constructions |
| Authors: | 羅婉君
Luo, Wan Jyun |
| Contributors: | 賴惠玲
Lai, Huei Ling
羅婉君
Luo, Wan Jyun |
| Keywords: | 框架語義
構式語法
客語放置類動詞
多義性
隱喻與轉喻
詞彙化
Frame semantics
Construction Grammar
Verbs of putting in Hakka
Verbal polysemy
Metaphor and Metonymy
Lexicalization |
| Date: | 2006 |
| Issue Date: | 2009-09-17 16:25:04 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本論文「客語「放」及其同類動詞：框架語義與構式之互動」以Fillmore (1985)提出的「框架語義」以及Goldberg (1995)等學者提出的「構式語法」觀點為基礎，分析客語「放」字構式呈現的多義現象。客語「放」字涉及「使動事件」：空間位移與狀態變化。本文著重分析「使動結構」與客語「放」字在動賓、動補及句子等構式中語意－句法的互動。同時藉助隱喻與轉喻的強化，說明客語「放」字延伸語意之間的關聯性，並進一步闡述客語「放」字在動賓結構中詞彙化為複合詞的現象。此外，本文亦檢視客語其他放置類動詞：方向同類動詞、工具同類動詞、方式同類動詞，經由審視其詞彙化類型與框架語義之互動，說明其語意內涵與句法上的表現。因此，本論文經由分析詞彙化類型與探討事件架構中參與角色的展現與否，說明客語放置類動詞語意與句法間的相互關係。
English verbs describing putting, a prototypical exemplar of a caused-motion activity, have been pervasively found to be the first acquired and the most frequently used verbs in many languages. Their semantic compatibility with various syntactic structures reinforces the association between verbal meanings and the constructions, giving rise to a grouping of related but distinct senses (Goldberg et al. 2004). Piong3 (放) ‘to put’ in Hakka is abundant in semantics. The basic meaning of piong3 designates a common pattern of human experience: An animate entity exerts manual force upon a physical object and causes the object to move. Adopting Goldberg’s (1995) Constructions and Fillmore’s (1985) Frame Semantics, this study aims to account for the meaning relatedness latent in piong3 and explicate the shades of meaning rooted in the set of its congeners with different degree of family resemblance. It is argued that the delicate nuances denoted by piong3 are derived from the interaction between frames and constructions while the extended meanings of piong3 are linked to its typical use through various metaphors and metonymies such as CONTAINER, EVENT STRUCTURE, CHANGE OF STATE AS CHANGE OF LOCATION metaphors and ACTION FOR RESULT metonymy. Furthermore, with regard to congeners of piong3 in Hakka, it is maintained that differences in profiling and lexicalization patterns capture the primary difference between piong3 and its congeners. Specifically, piong3 does not lexicalize other semantic elements (i.e. path, means, manner, result, and etc.) into its lexical meaning whereas its congeners explicitly do so, in that three subtypes of the congeners can be identified: directional congeners, means congeners, and manner congeners. |
| Reference: | -Boas, Hans Christian. 2003. A Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
-Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins and William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar, 281-302. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
-Chiang, Min-hua. 2006. Grammatical characteristics of tung and bun in Dongshi Hakka and the relatedness of the two markers. Language and Linguistics 7.2: 339-364.
-Chirkova, Katia and Christine Lamarre. 2007. The paradox of the construction [V zai NPLOC] and its meanings in the Beijing dialect of Mandarin. Typological Studies of the Linguistic Expression of Motion Events, Vol.1: Perspectives from East and Southeast Asia, ed. by Christine Lamarre and Toshio Ohori, 49-72. Tokyo: University of Tokyo.
-Croft, William. 1998. The structure of events and the structure of language. The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure, ed. by Michael Tomasello, 67-92. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
-Croft, William. 2001. Heads, arguments, and adjuncts. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective, 241-280. New York: Oxford University Press.
-Croft, William and Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Dixon, R. M. W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Dong, Siou-fang. 2002. Lexicalization of syntactic structure. Linguistics Study 3: 56-65.
-Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic PROTO-ROLES and argument selection. Language 67.3: 547-619.
-Fillmore, Charles J. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica VI. 222-255.
-Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay and Mary Kay O’Connor. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone. Language 64.3: 501-38.
-Fillmore, Charles J., and Berl T. S. Atkins. 1992. Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. Frames, Fields, and Contrasts, ed. by Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Feder Kittay, 75-102. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
-Fillmore, Charles J., and Beryl T. S. Atkins. 2000. Describing polysemy: The case of ‘crawl’. Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches, ed. by Yael Ravin and Claudia Leacock, 91-110. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Gao, Hong. 2001. The Physical Foundation of the Patterning of Physical Action Verbs: a Study of Chinese Verbs. Travaux de l’nstitut de linguistique de Lund XLI. Lund: Lund University.
-Gao, Hong, and Cheng Chin-chuan. 2003. Verbs of contact by impact in English and their equivalents in Mandarin Chinese. Language and Linguistics 4.3. 485-508.
-Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-Goldberg, Adele E., and Sethuraman, N. 2004. Learning argument structure generalizations. Cognitive Linguistics 14: 289-316.
-Goldberg, Adele E. 2005. Argument realization: The role of constructions, lexical semantics and discourse factors. Construction Grammars: Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, eds. By Ostman, Jan-Ola, and Mirjam Fried, 17-43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
-Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
-Hopper, Paul J. and Elizabeth Closs Traugott 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
-Heine, Bernd, and Ulrike Claudi. 1986. On the Rise of Grammatical Categories: Some Examples from Maa. Berlin: Reimer.
-Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. New York: Oxford University Press.
-Heine, Bernd. 1997. Cognitive Foundations of Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Heine, Bernd, and Tania Kuteva. 2002. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Huang, Yu-chun .2006. A Lexical-Semantic Analysis of Mandarin Chinese Near-Synonym Pair "fang4" and "bai3". Journal of Chinese Language Teaching 3.1: 27-44.
-Iwata, Seizi. 2005a. Locative alternation and two levels of verb meanings. Cognitive Linguisitcs16.2: 355-407.
-Iwata, Seizi. 2005b. The role of verb meaning in locative alternations. Grammatical Constructions: Back to Roots, ed. by Mirjam Fried and Hans C. Boas, 101-118. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
-Jackendoff, Ray S. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
-Jackendoff, Ray S. 1997. Twistin’ the night away. Language 73:534-559.
-Jackendoff Ray S. 2002. Foundations of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Kay, Paul and Charles J. Fillmore. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The what’s X doing Y? construction. Language 75: 1-33.
-Kövecses, Zoltan and Gunter Radden. 1998. Metonymy: developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics 9.1: 37-77.
-Lai, Huei-ling. 2003. Hakka LAU constructions: A constructional approach. Language and Linguistics 4.2: 353-378.
-Lai, Huei-ling. 2003. The semantic extension of Hakka LAU. Language and Linguistics 4.3: 533-561.
-Lamarre, Christine. 2007. The linguistic encoding of motion events in Chinese: with reference to cross-dialectal variation. Typological Studies of the Linguistic Expression of Motion Events, Vol.1: Perspectives from East and Southeast Asia, ed. by Christine Lamarre and Toshio. Ohori, 3-33. Tokyo: University of Tokyo.
-Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
-Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
-Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verbs Classes and Alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-Li, Charles N. and Sandra A. Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
-Lien, Chinfa. 2000. A frame-based account of lexical polysemy in Taiwanese.
-Lien, Chinfa. 2004. Polyfunctionality of pang3 in Taiwanese Southern Min: An exploration of the relationship between meaning and form. BIBLID 22.1: 391-418.
-Lieven, E. V. M., Pine, J. M., and Baldwin, G. 1997. Lexically-based learning and early grammatical development. Journal of Child Language 24: 187-219.
-Liu, Meichun. 2002. Verbs of surface contact in Mandarin: A lexical semantic study. Form and Function: Linguistic Studies in Honor of Shuanfan Huang, ed. by Lily I-wen Su, Chinfa Lien, and Kawai Chui, 275-304. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.
-Luo, Zhao-jin. 1988. Hakka Grammar. Taipei: Studentbook Publishing.
-Nemoto, Noriko. 2005. Verbal polysemy and frame semantics in construction grammar: Some observations on the locative alternation. Grammatical Constructions: Back to Roots, ed. by Mirjam Fried and Hans C. Boas, 119-136. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
-Nunberg, G., Ivan A. Sag, and Tom Wasow. 1994. Idioms. Language 70.3:491-538.
-Pinker, Steven. 1989. Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
-Ruiz de Mendoza Ibañez, Francisco J. and Olga I. Díez Velasco. 2001. High-level metonymy and linguistic structure. Unpublished draft.
< http://sincronia.cucsh.udg.mx/metonymy.htm >.
-Shi, Yuzhi. 2001. The distinction between subject and topic in Chinese. China Journal 2:82-91.
-Slobin, Dan I. 1985. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. A Crosslinguistic study of language acquisition: Theoretical issues:Vol.2, ed. by D. I. Slobin, 1157-256. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
-Svorou, Soteria. 1994. The Grammar of Space. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
-Sweetser, Eve. E. 1986. Polysemy vs. abstraction: Mutually exclusive or complementary? Berkeley Linguistics Society 12:528-538.
-Sweetser, Eve. E. 1988. Grammaticalization and semantic bleaching. Berkeley Linguistic Society 14:389-405.
-Sweetser, Eve. E. 1990. From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure.
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
-Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon:Vol.3, ed. by Timothy Shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Tamly, Leonard. 2000. The windowing of attention in language: Toward a Cognitive Semantics, 261-309. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
-Taylor, John, R. 2003. Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-Tomesello, Michael 2000. The item-based nature of children’s early syntactic development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4:4:156-163.
-Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Ekkehard Konig. 1991. The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited. Approaches to Grammaticalization, Vol. 1, ed. by E. C. Traugott and Bernard Heine, 189-218. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
-Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-Ungerer, F. and H. J. Schmid. 1996. The frame and attention approach: An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. England: Pearson Education Limited.
-Wang, Can-long. 2005. Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Two Chinese case studies of "henbude" (恨不得) and "wuse" (物色). Contemporary Linguistics 7.3: 225-236.
-Xiang, Meng-bing. 1997. Grammatical Studies of Liancheng Hakka. Peking: Language Publishing House |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
93555007
95 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0093555007 |
| 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.
|
