从论元角度看“王冕死了父亲”

An Explanation of "王冕死了父亲" in Terms of Argument

传统语法一般将实词性动词分为两大类 :及物动词 ,不及物动词。凡须直接带宾语的动词是及物动词 ,凡不能直接带宾语的动词是不及物动词。然而有一个较特殊的句子“王冕死了父亲”,曾经引起广泛的关注。以往的文献中已经有了不少讨论 ,的确给我们提供了很多思考问题的角度 ,但似乎都对“死”为什么会有这样的用法避而不谈。简单地将“死”定义为一元动词 ,说服力不是很强。为什么不及物动词“死”会有这种用法呢 ?本文运用有关论元的理论对“死”及一系列的动词进行分析 ,提出这类动词除了一元动词的意义和用法外 ,还有二元动词的意义和用法。

Traditionally, notional verbs are divided into two categories: transitive verbs and intransitive verbs. Verbs, which can take a direct object, are called transitive verb; those, which can not take a direct object, are called intransitive verb. A special Chinese sentence-'王冕死了父亲'- in which the intransitive verb '死'(die) takes a direct object, has long been the focus of attention. Previous studies relevant to this sentence have provided us with various points of view, however, almost all the studies evade exploring the reason of such a phenomenon. It is not very convincing to simply claim that '死' is a one argument verb. This paper employs the theory of argument to analyze '死' and a series of verbs in Chinese, and draws the conclusion that in addition to the meaning and usage of one argument verbs, this series of verbs also have the meaning and usage of two argument verbs.