期刊文献+

汉英对比语言学研究的本体途径 被引量:2

An Ontological Approach to Chinese-English Contrastive Linguistics
原文传递
导出
摘要 尽管现代语言学研究多姿多彩,但以思维方式为基点的本体研究并不多见。本文正是从悟性思维与理性思维的不同特性出发对比研究汉语和英语中具有类型学意义的结构形式,即话题优先与主语优先句式、"意念被动"与被动语态、语气词副词与虚拟语气等。例证的分析和论证为这两种语言结构的根本差异提供本体解释并支持如下论点:思维方式与语言结构形式构成对立统一关系。 Despite the plethora of literature on linguistics, few ontological studies have been undertaken of linguistic structures from a thinking mode approach. This paper discusses the differences between major Chinese and English linguistic structures of typological importance, tracing their sources to Western rationality and Chinese intuition respectively. The paper presents an analysis of the characteristics of the two modes of thought and contrasts their reflections in the two languages, i.e. topic prominence vs subject prominence,"notional passive"vs passive voice, modal adverbs vs subjunctive mood, etc. The paper concludes that thought and language constitute a unity of opposites.
作者 邱述德
机构地区 辽宁大学
出处 《中国外语》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第2期83-89,93,共8页 Foreign Languages in China
关键词 悟性思维 理性思维 语言结构 对立统一 本体 Chinese intuition Western rationality linguistic structure unity of opposites ontology
  • 相关文献

参考文献24

  • 1Boroditsky, L. Does language shape thought? Mandarin and English speakers'conception of time [J]. Cognitive Psychology, 2001,43(1).
  • 2Caroll, J.B. Linguistic relativity and language learning [A]. In J. Allen & S. Corder (eds). Readings for Applied Linguistics [C]. London: OUP, 1977.
  • 3Comrie, Bernard. Language Universals and Linguistic Typology [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981.
  • 4Dewey, J. Human Nature & Conduct." An Introduction to Social Psychology [M]. New York: Holt, 1922.
  • 5Goldstone, R.L. Influences of categorization on perceptual discrimination [J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1994:123.
  • 6Goddard C. & A.Wierzbicka. Universal human concepts as a basis for contrastive linguistic semantics [A]. In J. Lachlen Mackenzie et al. (eds). Current Trends in Contrastive Linguistics [C]. Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2008.
  • 7Kay, P. & Kempton, W. What is the Sapir - Whorf hypothesis? [J]. American Anthropologist, 1984: 86.
  • 8Lakoff, G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things [M]. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1987: 31-40, 61, 65, 67, 88-90.
  • 9Langacker, R.W. Cognitive Grammer [M]. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2008:512-517.
  • 10Levinson, S. Frames of reference and Molyneux's question: Cross linguistic evidence [A]. In P. Bloom & M. Peterson (eds). Language and Space [C]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.

二级参考文献10

共引文献208

同被引文献29

引证文献2

二级引证文献10

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部