期刊文献+

汉语所属型句子中量词词义标准化的实验研究

An Experimental Study on the Standardized Meaning of Chinese Measure Word in Possession Sentence
原文传递
导出
摘要 "an X"表达式在人和物所属关系确定中所起的作用和人们对"an X"扩展义的认知模式一直是语用学界讨论的热点。通过利用DMDX语言记录分析系统对比分析得出的相关数据显示,在"亲密所属关系"中量词的扩展义"自己的"是标准化了的凸显含义。人脑处理该凸显义采用的是平行认知机制,即语境含义的处理与凸显义的处理同时且平行进行,但标准义的凸显效果大于语境作用,使得凸显义的得出快于语境含义的得出。 The recent controversial issue in pragmatics is concerned with the cognitive processing model of "an X" and its role in identifying the possessive relationship between man and subject. The paper first discusses the linguistic factors influencing the possessive relationship, and introduces different processing models of "an X". Then the researchers use DMDX to record the participants’ response time of Chinese measure word’s enriched meanings in two types of possession sentences with and without context respectively in order to explore its cognitive processing. The experimental data suggests that in inalienable possessive relationship the enriched meaning "my own" is the salient meaning of Chinese measure word to the extent of being standardized, which is processed parallel with the contextual meaning. Standardized meaning has a stronger impact on sentence understanding than context effect, so it is processed out faster than contextual meaning.
作者 李然
出处 《外语艺术教育研究》 2013年第2期14-20,共7页 Educational Research on Foreign Languages and Arts
基金 教育部人文社会科学研究青年基金项目“对汉语字面意义认知机制的语用实验研究”(10YJC740059)
关键词 人和物的所属关系 汉语量词 标准化含义 实验研究 possessive relationship Chinese measure word standardized meaning experimental study
  • 相关文献

参考文献7

二级参考文献49

  • 1蒋勇.夸张性隐喻的梯级含义功能[J].现代外语,2004,27(3):274-281. 被引量:22
  • 2Gibbs, R. W. Jr.,1994. The Poetics of Mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • 3Gibbs, R. W. Jr., 2002. A new look at literal meaning in understanding what is said and implicated~.Journal of Pragmatics 34,457 - 86.
  • 4Gibbs, R. W. Jr. and R. J. Grrig. 1989. How context makes metaphor comprehension seem'special'. Met- aphor and Symbolic Activity 4,3 : 145 - 58.
  • 5Glucksberg, S. 1989. Metaphors in conversation: How are they understood? Why are they used? Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 4,3 : 125 - 43.
  • 6Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan, eds. Speech Acts: Syntax and se- mantics. Vol. 3, Pp. 41 - 58. New York : Academic Press.
  • 7Grice, H. P.1978. Some further notes on logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan, eds. Pragmatics:Syntax and semantics. Vol. 9, Pp. 113 - 27. New York: Academic Press.
  • 8Giora, R. 1997. Understanding figurative and literal language: The graded salience hypothesis. Cognitive Linguistics 7,1:183 -206.
  • 9Giora, R. 1999. On the priority of salient meanings: Studies of literal and figurative language. Journal of Pragmatics 31:919 -29.
  • 10Giora, R. 2003. On Our Mind: Salience, Context and Figurative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

共引文献62

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部