跨语言视角下的汉语中动句研究

Chinese Middles: A Cross-linguistic Perspective

本文根据分布式形态学的基本假设,认为汉语中动句中的"起来"属于"轻动词v_(BECOME)",而主动词为合并到不同位置的词根。词根合并到v_(BECOME)补足语位置时,获得"结果状态"的解读,此时动词后的词组为副词,修饰整个[v_(BECOME)P]。当词根嫁接到v_(BECOME)位置,则成为v_(BECOME)的修饰语,获得"状态变化的方式"解读;此时动词后的词组位于v_(BECOME)的补足语位置,为形容词词组,获得"结果状态"的解读,修饰全句的主语。本文将汉语中动句的研究置于跨语言的中动句研究背景下,指出不同的印欧语的中动结构本身具有各异的句法特征,而汉语中动句也表现出另外一类不同的句法特征。以此为基础,本文初步分析了不同语言如何根据各自词库的特征推导出中动结构的基本模式。

This paper attempts to provide an account of the qilai middle construction in Chinese.Unlike English middles,in Chinese,an additional item,qilai,is attached to the matrix verb to form a middle construction which ascribes the dispositional property denoted by the VP to the subject.A general assumption proposed in this paper is that the item qilai in Chinese is multi-functional,which can serve as a verb,a directional particle,an inchoative aspectual marker,and a specific marker for middles.Based on the standard assumptions of Distributed Morphology,this paper argues that qilai in Chinese middles is a light verb,i.e.v BECOME,while the matrix verb is originally a Root merged in different syntactic positions.When merged in the complement position of[v BECOME P],the Root will take the interpretation of‘resultant state’,and the post-verbal phrase is an adverbial phrase modifying the whole[v BECOME P].When the Root is adjoined to the v BECOME head,it serves as the modifier of v BECOME,receiving the interpretation of‘manner of change of state’,and the post-verbal phrase,being an adjectival phrase,is merged in the complement position of v BECOME,predicated of the subject.Placing Chinese middles within a cross-linguistic research context,we postulate that the middles of Indo-European languages already exhibit different syntactic derivations,and the syntactic derivation of Chinese middles differs from all of such derivations.Based on this observation,we put forward an initial analysis of cross-linguistic syntactic patterns of middles that hinge upon the properties of the lexicon.The general classification depends on whether the lexicon has a morphological marker for middles:‘no’for languages like English,and‘yes’for languages like Chinese,Romance languages,and Greek.A further classification depends on the syntactic nature of different morphological markings,including the reflexive clitic in Romance,the non-active voice marker in Greek,and v BECOME functional item in Chinese,each involving a unique syntactic structure but all deriving the common properties of middle constructions.This research therefore implies that the label‘middle construction’is delineate by semantic criteria and it is on the wrong track to provide a unified structure for all middles across languages.