从分布式形态学看现代汉语语素“化”及其与英语后缀-ize的共性和差异

The nature and function of Mandarin hua(化)in comparison with English suffix-ize from the perspective of Distributed Morphology

本文采用分布式形态学的理论框架,探讨现代汉语语素"化"的性质与功能,并分析"化"与英语后缀-ize的共性和差异。文章认为"化"代表四个现代汉语的语言单位:两个无类词根,包括一个实现为自动词的词根和一个实现为使动词的词根;两个功能性核心成分,包括一个生成自动词的动词类赋予者和一个生成使动词的动词类赋予者。文章详细讨论了上述四个单位区分与定性的依据,并分析了两个动词类赋予者在构词中的句法功能和语义组配规律。以本文对"化"的研究结论和文献上对-ize的研究成果为基础,文章归纳总结了两者在区分与定性、组合对象的类型、语义组配规律三方面的共性,并简单讨论了两者的主要区别及其体现出来的汉、英语在构词上的类型差异。

This paper adopts the framework of Distributed Morphology to investigate the nature and function of Mandarin hua (化) and compare it with the English suffix-ize. A brief survey on the historical change of hua is first provided. And then it is claimed that hua represents four morphemes: two roots and two verbalizers. Distributional criteria are given to distinguish the roots from the verbalizers. The distinction between the two roots is made based on the verbs they realize: one root forms unaccusatives whereas the other forms causatives. It is argued that the two verbalizers combine with either monosyllabic roots or di/tri/multi-syllabic words to generate verbs. The reasons to distinguish the two verbalizers are that one generates causative verbs whereas the other generates unaccusative verbs, and that they have different semantics in verb formation. Based on the conclusions about hua drawn in this paper and about-ize made in the literature, it is pointed out that hua and-ize share a lot in common: both can be verbalizers, both merge with the same kinds of elements, and both have inchoative(become X) and causative(cause to become X) semantics. The main difference is that hua can also be a root whereas-ize cannot. The difference has to do with the typological difference in word formation between the two languages.