汉语普通话中定语的语义探索
|
摘要
名前形容词和名词所修饰的名词间有多种的语义关系:有的关系可以用连言(conjunction)解析,有的关系不可以。本文在前人研究的基础上探讨汉语普通话中偏正式名词短语中定语(形容词或者名词)和名词中心语之间的语义关系,并试图在此基础上实现汉语中定语的重新分野,目的是建构符合汉语实际的定语的语义系统。
本文以汉语中定语和其后中心语之间的语义关系为中心,试图解释为什么大多数的形容词、名词既可以放在名词前作定语,又可以在该名词作主语的条件下,置于句末充当谓语而不发生语义的改变,而有些名词或者名词却只能担当定语,而不能担当谓语,或者说在充当谓语时语义改变了具体来说,本文的研究主要包括以下几个方面:(一)汉语中偏正式名词短语的句法结构(syntax of AN);(二)形容词定语和名词中心语语义方面的相互作用;(三)名词定语和中心语语义方面的相互作用;(四)汉语普通话中定语的分类。
本篇论文应用内涵语义学。相关理论包括类型学理论,集合理论,可能世界,λ抽象和λ还原,蒙太格语法等,证明了在汉语中有些形容词(交集性,intersective)解释为外延义,有的(非交集性,non-intersective)则解释为内涵义.当原来偏正式名词短语中名词作主语时,非交集性形容词不能用于谓语。
本文的创新之处在于作者打破了传统意义上从复杂的逻辑语义和语用关系出发划分词类的思维模式,着眼于汉语中定语和其后名词中心语所指称的集合之间的三种可能关系,即它们之间的交集的可能结果。并据此把汉语普通话中定语划分为三类:交集性定语(包含度量定语),否定性定语,定性定语。
There is a range of semantic relationship between attributives and nouns among Mandarin noun phrasal structures. The semantic relationship between them in many cases is not amenable to an account in terms of conjunction. This thesis explores attributive semantics in Mandarin Chinese, attempts to sort out attributives based on this, and aims at establishing a semantics to it.
This thesis centers on thematic relation between attributives and the heads among Mandarin noun phrasal structure, attempting to contribute an interpretation of a linguistic fact that most of adjectives and nouns, can both precede the noun head as attributives and occur at the end of the sentence as predicates on the condition that the noun head turns to be subject with meaning unchanged, while some only function as attributives but not predicates or while they perform as predicates, the meaning is altered. Concretely speaking, this exploration mainly consists of (1) syntax of AN (attributives + noun); (2) interaction between adjectives and noun heads; (3) interaction between noun attributives and noun heads; (4) a taxonomy of mandarin attributives.
This thesis applies intensional semantics, and the relevant theories including conception of type, set, possible world,λabstraction andλdeduction, Montague’s Model Theory, etc., and proves that some attributives (intersective) are interpreted extensionally, and some (nonintersective) intensionally, and that the attributives which are used intensionally cannot turn to be used predicatively on the condition that the noun head occurs at the beginning of the sentence as the subject.
The main innovating point in this thesis is that the author does away the traditional thinking model of classifying based on the complicated semantic or pragmatic relation, focuses on the three possible circumstances of the relation between the set of attributives denotation ([A]) and that of noun denotation ([N]), i.e. the possible result of their intersect, and divides mandarin attributives into three classes: the intersective, the privative, and the qualitative.
本文以汉语中定语和其后中心语之间的语义关系为中心,试图解释为什么大多数的形容词、名词既可以放在名词前作定语,又可以在该名词作主语的条件下,置于句末充当谓语而不发生语义的改变,而有些名词或者名词却只能担当定语,而不能担当谓语,或者说在充当谓语时语义改变了具体来说,本文的研究主要包括以下几个方面:(一)汉语中偏正式名词短语的句法结构(syntax of AN);(二)形容词定语和名词中心语语义方面的相互作用;(三)名词定语和中心语语义方面的相互作用;(四)汉语普通话中定语的分类。
本篇论文应用内涵语义学。相关理论包括类型学理论,集合理论,可能世界,λ抽象和λ还原,蒙太格语法等,证明了在汉语中有些形容词(交集性,intersective)解释为外延义,有的(非交集性,non-intersective)则解释为内涵义.当原来偏正式名词短语中名词作主语时,非交集性形容词不能用于谓语。
本文的创新之处在于作者打破了传统意义上从复杂的逻辑语义和语用关系出发划分词类的思维模式,着眼于汉语中定语和其后名词中心语所指称的集合之间的三种可能关系,即它们之间的交集的可能结果。并据此把汉语普通话中定语划分为三类:交集性定语(包含度量定语),否定性定语,定性定语。
There is a range of semantic relationship between attributives and nouns among Mandarin noun phrasal structures. The semantic relationship between them in many cases is not amenable to an account in terms of conjunction. This thesis explores attributive semantics in Mandarin Chinese, attempts to sort out attributives based on this, and aims at establishing a semantics to it.
This thesis centers on thematic relation between attributives and the heads among Mandarin noun phrasal structure, attempting to contribute an interpretation of a linguistic fact that most of adjectives and nouns, can both precede the noun head as attributives and occur at the end of the sentence as predicates on the condition that the noun head turns to be subject with meaning unchanged, while some only function as attributives but not predicates or while they perform as predicates, the meaning is altered. Concretely speaking, this exploration mainly consists of (1) syntax of AN (attributives + noun); (2) interaction between adjectives and noun heads; (3) interaction between noun attributives and noun heads; (4) a taxonomy of mandarin attributives.
This thesis applies intensional semantics, and the relevant theories including conception of type, set, possible world,λabstraction andλdeduction, Montague’s Model Theory, etc., and proves that some attributives (intersective) are interpreted extensionally, and some (nonintersective) intensionally, and that the attributives which are used intensionally cannot turn to be used predicatively on the condition that the noun head occurs at the beginning of the sentence as the subject.
The main innovating point in this thesis is that the author does away the traditional thinking model of classifying based on the complicated semantic or pragmatic relation, focuses on the three possible circumstances of the relation between the set of attributives denotation ([A]) and that of noun denotation ([N]), i.e. the possible result of their intersect, and divides mandarin attributives into three classes: the intersective, the privative, and the qualitative.
引文
① Ding Shengshu. 1961. “Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jianghua”(Talks on Grammar of Contemporary Chinese). Shangwu Yinshuguan.
② Hanyu zhishi (Knowledge of Chinese), P69-172, 1979, People’s Education Press.
③ Huang Hansheng. 1981. Xiandai Hanyu (Contemporary Chinese), Shumu Wenxian Chubanshe.
④ Liu Yuehua. 1983. Shiyong Xiandai Hanyu Yufa (Practical Grammar for Contemporary Chinese). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
⑤ Huang Borong & Liao Hansheng. 1991. Xiandai Hanyu (Contemporary Chinese) (third edition). High Education Press.
⑥ Fang Yuqing. 1992. Shiyong Hanyu Yufa (Practical Chinese Grammar). Beijing Language College Press.
① Ding Shengshu, Lü suxiang, Li Rong, etc. 1961. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jianghua (Talks on Grammar of Contemporary Chinese), , ShangWu Yinshuguan.
② Liu Shiru.1963. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jiangyi (Lectures Notes on Grammar of Contemporary).Shangwu Yinshuguan.
③Lü Jiping, Wu Zhefu. 1960. Yufa Xiuci (Grammar and Rhetoric), P274-279. Heilongjiang Renmin Chubanshe.
④Huang Borong. 1963. Juzi-DE Fenxi yu Bianren (Analysis and Identification of Sentences), P52-55. Shanghai
[1] Bartning, Inge. 1976. Remarques sur la syntaxe et la sémantique des pseudo-adjectifs déniminaux en fran?ais [M]. Stockholm: Institute d’ Etudes Romanes, University of Stockholm.112-113.
[2] Bartning, Inge.1976/1980. Remarques sur les pseudoadjectifs dénominaux en fran?ais [R]. Stockholm. Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis 10. AWE International.
[3] Carnap, R. 1947. Meaning and Necessity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
[4] Chierchia, G & S. 2000. McConnell-Ginet. Intensionality. In Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics (second edition) [M]. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[5] Coulson, Seana & G. Fauconnier.1999. Fake guns and stone lions: conceptual blending and privative adjectives. Cognition and Function in Language [C]. In Barbara A. Fox. Dan Jurafsky and Laura A. Michaelis. (ed.). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information. 143-158.
[6] Dixon, Robert M. W. 1982. Where Have All the Adjectives Gone? Berlin-Amsterdam-NewYork: Mouton. 1-62.
[7] Fauconnier, G. 1994. Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Frege, Gottlob. (1892) über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Philosophische Kritik 100:22-50. Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Translated into On sense and reference in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.). 1952. Oxford: Blackwell. 56-78.
[9] Frawley, William. 1901. Linguistic Semantics [M]. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum. 447-480.
[10]Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics [J]. Linguistic Inquiry 16. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 547-593.
[11]Hokett, Charles F. 1960. The Origin of Speech [J]. Scientific American 203. 89-96.
[12]Hokett, Charles F & S. A Altmann . A Note on Design Features [R]. In:Thomas A. Sebok (Editor) Animal Communication: Techniques of Study and Resaults of Research [C]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 61-72.
[13]Kai Von Fintel, I. Heim. 2002. Lecture Notes on Intensional Semantics [Z]. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1-4.
[14]Keenan, Edward L., & L. M. Faltz. 1985. Boolean Semantics for Natural Language [M]. Dordrecht: D. Rediel Publishing Company. 7-8.
[15]Krifka, Manfred. 1998. Syllabus: Introduction to Semantics Linguistics [M]. Austin: University of Texas. 14-15.
[16]Lamb, Sydney M. 1964. The semantic approach to structural semantics[J]. American Anthropologist 66. Menasher: American Anthropological Association. 57-78.
[17]Lees, Robert B. 1960. The Grammar of English Nominalizations [C]. International Journal of American Linguistics 26 Supplement, Publication (12). 180-181.
[18]Levi, Judith N. 1975. The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals [M]. New York: Academic Press. 18-29.
[19]Lewis, David. 1970. General semantics. Synthese 22. Dordrecht: R. Reidel Publishing Company. 18-67.
[20]Montague, R. 1970. English as a formal language. In Bruno Viesentini et al.(ed.) Linguaggi nella Societa e nella Tecnica [M]. Milan: Edizioni di Comunita. 189-224.
[21]Montague, R. 1973. The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English. In K. J. J. Hintikka, J.M.E. Moravcsik and P. Suppes (eds.) Approaches to Natural Language [M]. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 221-242.
[22]Okayed, Nauka.1990. Semantic analysis of basic adjectives by concept formation process [R]. In: Werner Banner, Tacoma Scheldt, and Dieter Overeager (eds). Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Linguists (2) [M]. Berlin: Academia-Verlag.1225-1227.
[23]Pitt, David & K. Jerrold. 2000. Compositional Idioms [J]. Language 78: 409-432. Baltimore: The Linguistic Society of American. 409-432.
[24]Quirk, Randolph, et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language [M]. London: Longman. 402-403, 434-436.
[25]Raskin, Victor & I. Weiser.1987. Language and Writing: Applications of Linguistics to Rhetoric and Composition [M]. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. 116.
[26]Raskin, Victor.1994. Frawley: Linguistic Semantics. A review article [J]. Language 70:3. 552-556.
[27]Shramm, Aleksandr N. 1979. Ocherki po semantike kachestvennykh prilagatel’ nykh (na materiale sovremennogo russkoga yaayka) /Essays in the semantics of qualitative adjectives (on the material of the Russian language) [M]. Leningrad: Leningrad University Press. 6.
[28]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1976. Capturing the Russian adjectives. In B. H. Partee (ed.). Montague Grammar [M]. New York: Academic Press. 293-309.
[29]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1977. Measure adjectives in Montague grammar. In Steven Davis and Mariane Mithun (ed.). Linguistics,Philosophy and Montague Gramma [M]. Austin: University of Texas Press. 223-262.
[30]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1980. Capturing the Adjective. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
[31]Stalnaker, R. 1984. Linguistic Inquiry 4. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[32]Waren, Beatrice.1984. Classifying Adjectives [J]. Gothenbug Studies in English 56. G?teborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
[33]Yoon, Y. 1996. Total and Partial Predicates and the Weak and Strong Interpretation [J]. Natural Language Semantics 4: 217-236.
[34]韩玉国. 2001. 现代汉语形容词的句法功能及再分类[J]. 语言教学与研究. 2001(2): 47-54
[35]蔺璜. 2005 定语位置上的名词的句法表现及其语义特征[J]. 山西大学学报. 2005(2).
[36]吕叔湘, 饶长溶. 1984,试论非谓形容词. 汉语语法论文集(增订本)[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆. 329-358.
[37]吕叔湘, 朱德熙. 2002. 语法修辞讲话 [M]. 沈阳:辽宁教育出版社.
[38]郑怀德. 孟庆海. 1991. 形容词用法词典. 长沙:湖南出版社.
[39]朱德熙. 定语和状语[M]. 新知识出版社,1957
[40]朱德熙. 1956. 现代汉语形容词研究 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆. 67-103.
[41]朱德熙. 1982. 语法讲义 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆.
② Hanyu zhishi (Knowledge of Chinese), P69-172, 1979, People’s Education Press.
③ Huang Hansheng. 1981. Xiandai Hanyu (Contemporary Chinese), Shumu Wenxian Chubanshe.
④ Liu Yuehua. 1983. Shiyong Xiandai Hanyu Yufa (Practical Grammar for Contemporary Chinese). Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
⑤ Huang Borong & Liao Hansheng. 1991. Xiandai Hanyu (Contemporary Chinese) (third edition). High Education Press.
⑥ Fang Yuqing. 1992. Shiyong Hanyu Yufa (Practical Chinese Grammar). Beijing Language College Press.
① Ding Shengshu, Lü suxiang, Li Rong, etc. 1961. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jianghua (Talks on Grammar of Contemporary Chinese), , ShangWu Yinshuguan.
② Liu Shiru.1963. Xiandai Hanyu Yufa Jiangyi (Lectures Notes on Grammar of Contemporary).Shangwu Yinshuguan.
③Lü Jiping, Wu Zhefu. 1960. Yufa Xiuci (Grammar and Rhetoric), P274-279. Heilongjiang Renmin Chubanshe.
④Huang Borong. 1963. Juzi-DE Fenxi yu Bianren (Analysis and Identification of Sentences), P52-55. Shanghai
[1] Bartning, Inge. 1976. Remarques sur la syntaxe et la sémantique des pseudo-adjectifs déniminaux en fran?ais [M]. Stockholm: Institute d’ Etudes Romanes, University of Stockholm.112-113.
[2] Bartning, Inge.1976/1980. Remarques sur les pseudoadjectifs dénominaux en fran?ais [R]. Stockholm. Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis 10. AWE International.
[3] Carnap, R. 1947. Meaning and Necessity. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
[4] Chierchia, G & S. 2000. McConnell-Ginet. Intensionality. In Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics (second edition) [M]. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[5] Coulson, Seana & G. Fauconnier.1999. Fake guns and stone lions: conceptual blending and privative adjectives. Cognition and Function in Language [C]. In Barbara A. Fox. Dan Jurafsky and Laura A. Michaelis. (ed.). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information. 143-158.
[6] Dixon, Robert M. W. 1982. Where Have All the Adjectives Gone? Berlin-Amsterdam-NewYork: Mouton. 1-62.
[7] Fauconnier, G. 1994. Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Frege, Gottlob. (1892) über Sinn und Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Philosophische Kritik 100:22-50. Translations from the Philosophical Writings of Gottlob Frege, Translated into On sense and reference in P. Geach and M. Black (eds.). 1952. Oxford: Blackwell. 56-78.
[9] Frawley, William. 1901. Linguistic Semantics [M]. Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum. 447-480.
[10]Higginbotham, James. 1985. On semantics [J]. Linguistic Inquiry 16. Cambridge: The MIT Press. 547-593.
[11]Hokett, Charles F. 1960. The Origin of Speech [J]. Scientific American 203. 89-96.
[12]Hokett, Charles F & S. A Altmann . A Note on Design Features [R]. In:Thomas A. Sebok (Editor) Animal Communication: Techniques of Study and Resaults of Research [C]. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 61-72.
[13]Kai Von Fintel, I. Heim. 2002. Lecture Notes on Intensional Semantics [Z]. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1-4.
[14]Keenan, Edward L., & L. M. Faltz. 1985. Boolean Semantics for Natural Language [M]. Dordrecht: D. Rediel Publishing Company. 7-8.
[15]Krifka, Manfred. 1998. Syllabus: Introduction to Semantics Linguistics [M]. Austin: University of Texas. 14-15.
[16]Lamb, Sydney M. 1964. The semantic approach to structural semantics[J]. American Anthropologist 66. Menasher: American Anthropological Association. 57-78.
[17]Lees, Robert B. 1960. The Grammar of English Nominalizations [C]. International Journal of American Linguistics 26 Supplement, Publication (12). 180-181.
[18]Levi, Judith N. 1975. The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals [M]. New York: Academic Press. 18-29.
[19]Lewis, David. 1970. General semantics. Synthese 22. Dordrecht: R. Reidel Publishing Company. 18-67.
[20]Montague, R. 1970. English as a formal language. In Bruno Viesentini et al.(ed.) Linguaggi nella Societa e nella Tecnica [M]. Milan: Edizioni di Comunita. 189-224.
[21]Montague, R. 1973. The proper treatment of quantification in ordinary English. In K. J. J. Hintikka, J.M.E. Moravcsik and P. Suppes (eds.) Approaches to Natural Language [M]. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 221-242.
[22]Okayed, Nauka.1990. Semantic analysis of basic adjectives by concept formation process [R]. In: Werner Banner, Tacoma Scheldt, and Dieter Overeager (eds). Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Linguists (2) [M]. Berlin: Academia-Verlag.1225-1227.
[23]Pitt, David & K. Jerrold. 2000. Compositional Idioms [J]. Language 78: 409-432. Baltimore: The Linguistic Society of American. 409-432.
[24]Quirk, Randolph, et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language [M]. London: Longman. 402-403, 434-436.
[25]Raskin, Victor & I. Weiser.1987. Language and Writing: Applications of Linguistics to Rhetoric and Composition [M]. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex. 116.
[26]Raskin, Victor.1994. Frawley: Linguistic Semantics. A review article [J]. Language 70:3. 552-556.
[27]Shramm, Aleksandr N. 1979. Ocherki po semantike kachestvennykh prilagatel’ nykh (na materiale sovremennogo russkoga yaayka) /Essays in the semantics of qualitative adjectives (on the material of the Russian language) [M]. Leningrad: Leningrad University Press. 6.
[28]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1976. Capturing the Russian adjectives. In B. H. Partee (ed.). Montague Grammar [M]. New York: Academic Press. 293-309.
[29]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1977. Measure adjectives in Montague grammar. In Steven Davis and Mariane Mithun (ed.). Linguistics,Philosophy and Montague Gramma [M]. Austin: University of Texas Press. 223-262.
[30]Siegel, Muffy E. A. 1980. Capturing the Adjective. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
[31]Stalnaker, R. 1984. Linguistic Inquiry 4. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[32]Waren, Beatrice.1984. Classifying Adjectives [J]. Gothenbug Studies in English 56. G?teborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
[33]Yoon, Y. 1996. Total and Partial Predicates and the Weak and Strong Interpretation [J]. Natural Language Semantics 4: 217-236.
[34]韩玉国. 2001. 现代汉语形容词的句法功能及再分类[J]. 语言教学与研究. 2001(2): 47-54
[35]蔺璜. 2005 定语位置上的名词的句法表现及其语义特征[J]. 山西大学学报. 2005(2).
[36]吕叔湘, 饶长溶. 1984,试论非谓形容词. 汉语语法论文集(增订本)[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆. 329-358.
[37]吕叔湘, 朱德熙. 2002. 语法修辞讲话 [M]. 沈阳:辽宁教育出版社.
[38]郑怀德. 孟庆海. 1991. 形容词用法词典. 长沙:湖南出版社.
[39]朱德熙. 定语和状语[M]. 新知识出版社,1957
[40]朱德熙. 1956. 现代汉语形容词研究 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆. 67-103.
[41]朱德熙. 1982. 语法讲义 [M]. 北京:商务印书馆.