“进+处所宾语”和“去+处所宾语”

"jin+Locative Object" and "qu+Locative Object"

"进+处所宾语"倾向于包含言外之意,而"去+处所宾语"倾向于不包含言外之意。"进+处所宾语"中的事实主观性倾向非常明显,"去+处所宾语"中的事实则具有客观性倾向。"进+处所宾语"中的处所宾语不一定是特定的,"去+处所宾语"中的处所宾语往往是特定的,至少在说话人心目中是特定的。如果不计语境的影响,"进+处所宾语"中的事实是目的唯一性的事实,"去+处所宾语"中的事实是目的多样性的事实。这些差别是趋向动词的轻易程度与处所宾语的主观性程度合力的结果,因为在转喻理论中,空间性越强,发生转喻的可能性越大。

This thesis is to put forward that 'jin+locative object' tends to include illocutionary meaning while 'qu+locative object' intends to exclude illocutionary meaning. The facts in the 'jin+locative object' show the obvious tendency of subjectivity while the facts in 'qu+locative object' have the tendency of objectiveness. The object in 'jin+locative object' is not necessarily specific but the object in 'qu+locative object' is often specific, at least, in the mind of the speaker. If the effect of context is not considered, the destination of the facts in 'jin+locative object' is unique while the destination of the facts in 'qu+locative object' is diverse. These differences are due to the resultant force between the degree of difficulty of directive verbs and the degree of subjectivity of locative object.