“因果链”的表达策略与类型

The Strategy and Typology of “Causal Chain”Expressions

"因果链"这一复杂谓语结构在自然语言中是如何表达的?这个问题在语言类型学上是一个很重要的问题。本文的目的就是对该问题提出一个新见解。本文通过对汉语、英语和日语这三个不同形态类型的语言进行对比,进而提出人类表达"因果链"的策略相同而手段不同的观点。所谓策略相同是指,表达方式均由简单到繁杂,即从一次性构成方式到二次性构成方式。所谓手段不同是指,表达因果链的手段要受到该语言形态类型的制约。形态复杂的语言偏重于用词法手段表达,而形态简单的语言则偏重于用句法手段表达。

An important question in linguistic research is how complex predicates representing ＂causal chain＂ are formed in typologically different languages. This paper presents a new proposal bearing on this question. We compare three typologically different languages, i.e. Chinese, English, and Japanese, and argue for the following hypothesis： the strategy used to form causal chain predicates is crosslinguistically the same, but the ways in which they are formed can be varied from language to language. The common strategy employed to form causal chain complex predicates consists of two stages： the primary articulation, which is fundamental, and the secondary articulation, which provides the specifics. The primary articulation adds an end point to an event that has no inherent end point, resulting in the semantic frame [ action ＋ end point] and yielding an accomplishment event. The secondary articulation further supplies restrictive elements and sets specific restrictions on the attained end point. On the other hand, the different manners for the formation of chain complex predicates arise from the different typological traits of the languages. For example, a morphologically complex language tends to use morphological means to form complex predicates, as in Japanese, which invariably uses morphological rather than syntactic means for the primary articulation. On the other hand, morphological simple languages tend to employ syntactic means to form complex predicate, as in Thai, which depends on syntactic means for the primary articulation. English is somewhere between morphologically complex languages and morphologically simple languages. As a result, both morphological means and syntactic means are used for the primary articulation of complex predicates. Chinese as an analytic language tends to employ syntactic means for the primary articulation of the complex predicates. The sole difference between Chinese and Thai is that the resultative constructions in Chinese are subject to a further lexicalization process, whereas those in Thai are not.