限定量词的语义解读及其句法语义结构关系

The Semantic Interpretation of Determiner Quantifiers and the Relationship between Syntactic Structure and Semantic Structure of Sentences with Determiner Quantifiers

根据Herburger(1997,2000),在阶段性谓词的语境中,处在限定量词内部论元位置的焦点对弱量化词而不是强量化词的语义解读有影响,而处在VP中的焦点对强量化词和弱量化词的语义解读都有影响。本文在此基础之上,进一步详细考察处在VP中的焦点对限定量词语义解读的影响;同时考察限定量词句的句法结构与语义结构的关系及其原因。本文认为,当焦点处在VP中时,全称限定量词实际难以对焦点敏感,其他限定量词对焦点敏感,但由于其比例解读和焦点解读的真值存在不同的蕴涵关系,使得其体现出的对VP内焦点的敏感性的强弱程度不同;限定量词句的语义结构在阶段性谓词的语境中受焦点影响而跟句法结构产生不一致关系,且这种不一致关系强弱量化词有别,原因在于阶段性谓词表示的具体场景中的具体事件,更容易成为参与者成分的标志而起到帮助辨识参与者的作用;弱量化词的强述谓性和强量化词的话题性,使得其内部论元位置的焦点成分在是否能移到LF层的VP中有别。

Hcrburger （ 1997, 2000） observed that in contexts with stage-level predicates, focus in internal argument position of DQs has a truth-conditional effect on the interpretation of weak but not strong DQs, while focus in VP affects the interpretation of both weak and strong DQs. On the basis of Herburger （ 1997, 2000）, this paper aims to give a full picture of the way focus in VP influences the interpretation of weak and strong DQs, and based on the observations of the way focus in VP works, the paper tries to find out how and why syntactic structure and semantic structure are mismatched in sentences with DQs. It is pointed out that while universal quantifiers are insensitive to focus in VP, non- universal quantifiers are sensitive to it; the degree of focus-sensitivity of non-universal quantifiers varies from quantifier to quantifier, which is due to different entailing relation between the truth condition of their proportional reading （ where the restriction is provided by the internal NP） and that of their focus-affected reading （ where the restriction is provided by the non-focused part of the sentence）. The reason why focus has a structuring effect on semantic structure of DQ-sentences with stage-level predicates but not on that of DQ^sente^ce~ w^t~ ~,~dua^-~e,~e~ predicates ~,~e~ ~ t^e fact t^at t^e ~en^tati^n~ ~f stage~ level predicates are quite different from those of individual-level ones. What stage-level predicates denote are concrete events taking place in some specific temporal and spacial domain, while the denotations of individual-level ones are characteristics or properties that are relatively stable over time. As for why sentences with weak DQs allow for more mismatch between their syntactic structure and semantic structure than those with strong DQs, it is argued that weak DQ are of strong predicative properties and strong DQs are of strong topical properties and it is such a contrast that is responsible for whether the movement of a focused element in internal NP of the DQs to VP at LF is allowed or not： being strongly topical, strong DQs have a tight relation with the NP in its internal argument position, thus prohibiting their movement. All the restrictions on the focus-sensitive phenomena in sentences with DQs observed in this paper and in previous literature show that the occurrence of mismatch between semantic structure and syntactic structure is highly limited; in parallel with the linear order of subject-predicate is the topic-comment articulation--the basic semantic/pragmatic function of a sentence. In other words, the direct mapping between syntactic structure and semantic structure is what natural language prefers.