期刊文献+

英汉存在构式与动词语义关联的实证对比研究 被引量:17

An empirical and contrastive study of the semantic association between verbs and existential constructions in English and Chinese
原文传递
导出
摘要 英语there构式和汉语"V着"构式均以"存在"为基本义,是两种语言中表达该概念的典型构式。本文采用Stefanowitsch & Gries(2003)的"构式搭配分析法",计算出两构式与动词之间的关联度,考察两者在动词语义分布、构式中心语义及描述事件的特征等方面是否存在差异。研究发现:1)汉语"V着"构式能产性高,但语义相对集中,描述的事件范围较窄;2)两构式与动词关联度的排序反映了两者的中心语义差异及事件表达规律;3)英语there构式对描述的事件既可采用"近景化识解",也可采用"远景化识解",而汉语"V着"构式的识解方式仅限于前者;4)动词与构式的语义相容程度可在"状态-事件"、"客观-主观"、"整体-部分"这三个维度上进行分析。 There-construction in English and V-zhe(着)construction in Chinese are the two canonical constructions in the two languages to express the concept of existence.This paper adopts a collostructional analysis to work out the collostruction strength between verbs and the two constructions and further analyzes their semantic associations.It is found that 1)While Chinese V-zhe construction is far more productive than English there-construction,its meaning is more focused and the event types described are more restricted;2)The differences in distributions,semantic types and association degrees of English and Chinese existential verbs reflectrules regarding event descriptions and subtle differences in the central meaning of the two constructions;3)There-construction and its Chinese counterpart also have different construing strategies,in that the former involves both internal and external perspective in viewing an event while the latter only allows internal perspective;4)The semantic compatibility of verbs and existential constructions can be analyzed in terms of three dimensions:the state-event dimension,the objective-subjective dimension and the whole-part dimension.
出处 《外语教学与研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2015年第6期826-837,959,共12页 Foreign Language Teaching and Research
基金 国家社科基金青年项目"面向自然语言处理的构式自动判别模型研究"(15CYY025) 高等学校全国优秀博士学位论文作者专项资金资助项目"英汉标记构式的神经认知机制研究"(201310)资助
  • 相关文献

参考文献35

  • 1Adam, M. 2012. Existential there-construction as a means of presentation in narrative (A corpus-based syntactic-semantic analysis) [J]. Linguistica Pragensia 22: 1-17.
  • 2Collins, P. 2012. Singular agreement in there-existentials: An intervarietal corpus-based study [J]. English World-Wide 33: 53-68.
  • 3Crawford, W. 2005. Verb agreement and disagreement: A corpus investigation of concord variation in existential there + be constructions [J]. Journal of English Linguistics 33: 35-61.
  • 4Goldberg, A. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Struc- ture [M]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • 5Goldberg, A. 1997. Relationships between verb and construction [A]. In M. Verspoor & E. Sweetser (eds.). Lexicon and Grammar [C]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 383-398.
  • 6Goldberg, A. 2006. Constructions at Work [M]. Oxford: OUP.
  • 7Gries, S. & A. Stefanowitsch. 2004. Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based per- spective on ' alternations' [J]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 1 .. 97-129.
  • 8Gries, S., B. Hampe & D. Schonefeld. 2005. Converging evidence: Bringing together experi- mental and corpus data on the association of verbs and constructions [J]. Cognitive Lin- guistics 4: 635-676.
  • 9Gries, S., B. Hampe & D. Sch6nefeld. 2010. Converging evidence II. More on the association of verbs and constructions [A]. In J. Newman & S. Rice (eds.). Empirical and Experimental Methods in Cognitive/Functional Research [C]. Stanford, CA.. CSLI. 59-72.
  • 10Langacker, R. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive Application [M]. Cambridge, MA.: Stanford University Press.

二级参考文献108

共引文献436

同被引文献183

引证文献17

二级引证文献39

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