试论汉英肤觉形容词义位衍生现象的共性与差异

通过引申和比喻扩展词义是语言系统高度发展的特征之一。以汉英肤觉形容词为切入点,运用词汇语义逻辑理论,发现两种语言在义位衍生机制方面存在共性,即引申、比喻义位的衍生分别遵循“以属指名”和“以名指属”的语义逻辑机制。通过对比还发现,英语作为形态语言,衍生的义位明显多于汉语,而汉语衍生义位的透明度和理据性更高。

“X的X,Y的Y”构式的形、动二分格局及其特征探析

“X的X,Y的Y”是一种常见的构式,其构式义是对人或事物状态的多种描绘,以及对动作或事件的分项列举。通过分析“X的X,Y的Y”构式的构成成分,发现“X的X,Y的Y”构式在形式、功能上呈现出明显的形、动二分格局,并具有以下特征:形容词、动词以外的词类不能进入该构式;形容词类“X的X,Y的Y”构式总表示消极义;“X的X”或“Y的Y”不能单说。本研究集中描写“X的X,Y的Y”构式在形容词类和动词类上的差异,并运用语言使用中的语用推理、认知框式激活效应以及信息结构的足量原则等对上述语言现象作出一定的解释,以期为现代汉语常见构式的研究提供借鉴,同时加深对现代汉语动词词类、形容词词类范畴的认识。

构式语法框架下清涧方言“圪AA的”状态形容词研究

陕北晋语清涧方言中“圪AA的”状态形容词有180多个且在日常生活中使用频繁,按照构式语法属于四字格构式。形态上,该构式中A可以是形容词、动词和拟声词。“圪AA的”表达式一部分是通过其对应的“A”式“圪A”式、“AA的”式经重叠、加缀等形态变化生成,一部分是通过给“圪AA的”构式填充A后再将其重叠的结果。句法上,该构式可以在句中作谓语、定语、补语和状语,不受单音节否定词修饰,但可以用在“不/没说”含有对比的否定句中。该构式的基本义为描绘性,其语义和语用内涵包括“极致性”语义量值、“消极/负面性”立场态度偏向和“口语性”语体色彩。

现代汉语“×然”形容词的句法功能研究

该文在“原型范畴”理论和“词类的功能分布”思想视域下,运用定量统计与定性分析相结合、现象描写与理论解释相结合的方法,考察《现代汉语词典》(2016)“×然”形容词的词类特征及句法功能。“×然”形容词有唯状类、兼状类、不可状类三种类别。唯状类“×然”形容词是只具备形容词非典型句法功能的单功能词。兼状类“×然”形容词属多功能词,构成“×然”形容词的主体。不可状类“×然”形容词是只具备形容词典型句法功能的单功能词。在句法功能的典型性维度上,“×然”形容词的典型功能与非典型功能呈此消彼长的连续统,在词类分布特征适应性上亦呈从典型的性质形容词向边缘过渡的连续统。

词类的独立性与内部异质性——突厥语族语言形容词的形态句法类型

语言类型学主要依据跨语言的形态和句法标准对不同语言的主要词类进行界定和描述。通过对不同形态句法参项的系统考察,突厥语族语言形容词类具有区别于名词和动词的典型形态句法特征,可以识别为一个独立的词类。典型形容词A1主要编码核心属性义,兼具修饰性和陈述性功能,派生形容词A2主要编码边缘属性义,修饰性功能较陈述性功能凸显。形容词的构成方式与句法功能及语义间的关联性体现出黏着语言形容词类内部的异质性特征。属性义是排除一些边缘类成员的重要标准,属性义的逐渐淡化决定了一些无形态变化小词在形容词—动词连续统间的游离状态。

基于生成词库理论的现代汉语“酸”多义性研究

本文运用语料库技术,在生成词库论、论元结构和物性结构的指导下,对“酸”字在现代汉语中的义项分布情况进行重新描写,除《现代汉语词典》中的5个义项外,还发现5个新义项。

地方记忆共同体的实词系统构建方式——以《马桥词典》为例

小说《马桥词典》用回忆的方式串联起马桥人独特的精神世界,在极具地方性特色的认知形态、价值评判标准和施为方式中,体现出作为马桥记忆共同体的建构过程,显示出了地方性与记忆的复杂关系。名词词条展露马桥人极具特色的地方性认知,记忆共同体的实现以个体的认知形态作为基础;形容词词条表现马桥人价值评判标准在个人和共同体之中的牵系方式,形成带有明显地方情感和心理的认同;动词词条体现马桥人个体与集体的独特施为方式,在记忆中将行为放在社会共识下的伦理中进行考量。

程度视角下“有点儿+A_(褒)”的语义研究

根据程度语义学的分析框架,“有点儿+A_(褒)”结构中的形容词具有等级形容词、相对形容词、评价类形容词的特点和属性,其真值语义因语境和比较标准的不同而存在模糊性,主观性强。程度副词“有点儿”的主要语义功能是对后接形容词在量级上的程度进行操作,是表主观量的程度词。“有点儿+A_(褒)”结构的整体语义表示个体在具体某一维度上的程度超出了主观期望的标准,这在一定程度上解释了为什么该结构具有反预期义和意外义的原因。

“突然、忽然”的词类标注问题与对策——一项语言学量子转向视域下的研究

汉语词类问题的争论旷日持久,为了更好解决这一纷繁复杂的问题,语言学研究亟需完成从牛顿经典科学思维到量子思维的转向。查阅10部大中型标注词类的权威汉语汉英词典发现“突然、忽然”的词类标注以及释义配例呈现显著分歧。有鉴于此,基于语言学量子转向视域,以双层词类范畴化理论模型为指导,考察了“突然、忽然”在国家语委语料库的真实用法模式,根据其规约化程度提取出了“突然、忽然”在词典的真实词类表征。同时论证了汉语形容词包含副词的词类模式违背了汉语语言事实,并探讨其背后症结所在。针对这些问题,未来汉语词类研究亟需完成语言学量子转向,挣脱简约原则的束缚,积极拥抱双层词类范畴化理论模型,大胆开展语言实证研究。

涟源方言形容词重叠研究

涟源方言的形容词的重叠式非常丰富。本文将从构成形式、语法功能、语义特征来考察。涟源方言中的形容词重叠式有AA式、AABB、ABAB、A里AB、AXBX、XA巴A、A打AB、AXAY、XAYB、ABAC等。其语义特征表现为加深或削减其程度;描绘状态,增强状态的形象性和生动性和加强主观情感。其句法功能可从它充当句法成分的能力和组合功能两方面分析,涟源方言的重叠式可充当谓语、状语、补语、定语,一般不能受程度副词和否定副词的修饰。

北京话及普通话阴平式强化变调补说

北京话及普通话里存在小称变调,其根本形式是阴平式小称变调(由非阴平调变来),补充形式是阳平式小称变调和去声式小称变调(主要由阴平调变来),它们都衍生出了强化变调。本文补充论述其中的阴平式强化变调。它既体现在个体性的词语上,又体现在成类别的词语即形容词的各类生动形式上。

现代汉语新兴流行构式“比A更A”研究

现代汉语新兴流行构式“比A更A”用差比的形式表达“超A”的超范畴义,在结构、句法和语义上均与典型差比结构“比X更Y”存在较大的不同。能进入该构式的变量A需是具有[+量度义]的非定量性质形容词。构式整体对变量A存在构式压制,前A从陈述转为指称过程中,A特性的量域发生特定化转变,成为一个可供比较的指称对象。言者通过“比A更A”构式,表示比较主体S在A的程度上超越A范畴本身,来极言S程度之高。在构式“比A更A”形成的过程中,语言的隐喻及语义融合是其重要的衍生机制。

维吾尔语形容词名词化:一种语言现象的初步探讨

该文主要研究的是维吾尔语形容词名词化的汉译问题。目前,对于形容词名词化的研究大多侧重于世界上主流语言的分析,而对于维吾尔语这一少数民族语言的形容词名词化现象的研究尚且匮乏。在维吾尔语中,形容词通过特定的语法结构转化为名词,这种转变不仅改变了词汇的词性,更赋予了词汇新的含义和用法。在翻译过程中,译者需要准确地把握维吾尔语形容词名词化后词汇的含义和用法,同时还要考虑到汉语的表达习惯和语境。深入研究维吾尔语形容词名词化现象,不仅能够更加深刻地理解其背后的语言规律和文化内涵,更能够把握其在汉译中的灵活运用,从而有效提升翻译的水平和质量,推进跨文化交流与沟通。

初中英语定语从句教学的难点与突破策略

文章深入探讨了定语从句教学中的四大挑战:语法规则的深层结构与表层形式的矛盾、母语思维模式的干扰、认知发展阶段的局限性,以及语境缺失与意义剥离的教学现状。这些挑战影响了学生对定语从句的准确理解和有效运用。为应对这些挑战,教师需要采取针对性的教学策略,如构建认知桥梁、强化语境教学、考虑学生的认知发展阶段,以及减少母语负迁移等。通过这些策略,教师可以帮助学生更好地掌握定语从句的用法,提高他们的英语语法水平和语言交际能力。

On the Association and Collocation of Lexicology:Between Adjectives and Prepositions

Before we focus association and collocation on a given subject,it is highly important to pay attention to association and collocation between word-classes.The essay endeavors to restate the key rules of association and collocation and restrict itself to the associative and collocative relationship between adjectives and prepositions.

小议near作prepositional adjective

本文作者对near在句中作介词形容词用法进行了讨论和归纳,使得中国学生和初学者更容易理解。从而得出:同一个词在不同的句中可有不同的词性。

The Dynamicity of the Transformation‘Nouns to Adjectives’

The contradiction between the unlimited cognitive needs and limited means of expression of human beings caused the phenomenon of lexical decategorization.There are many examples of nouns that are used as adjectives in Chinese.The evolution of languages is undying and it occurs at anytime.The phenomenon of‘nouns to adjectives’has dynamicity.There is a big difference in the completeness within this phenomenon and it performs as a unidirectional continuum.

Sentences with Object-oriented Adverbials and the Syntax-Semantics Interface

SOOAs refer to the phenomenon that the state adjective in the adverbial position is semantically associated with the object.In this paper this fact will be accounted for by invoking the properties of a pre-syntactic level of semantic representation and its interplay with syntax proper.It will be argued that the object-oriented adverbial is not derived from the attributive;in effect,it is base-generated in the complement position.A model of projection of arguments that allows for this will be proposed.It will be shown that the other special properties of SOOAs follow from the way the verb’s object and complement are represented at the pre-syntactic level.In particular,it will be shown that the underlying structure must satisfy both the requirement of the syntactic system and the requirement of the semantic system.The presence of any symbol in a representation is conditional.The theta-roles of internal arguments are assigned by the predicate,which is locally constrained,whereas the theta-roles of external arguments are assigned by the maximal projection of the predicate,viz.VP.When an external argument occurs,there is an empty predicate position in the representation,for there is an asymmetry between the conceptual system and the syntactic system.Derivation involves Move-αand Generalized Transformation.Different use of derivation methods gives rise to various forms of constructions in Chinese.Similarly,different semantic orientations result from different distributions.The state adjective is base-generated in the position behind the object because its nature is to serve the function of the complement of the object.It co-occurs with the object in the embedded VP because they are closely related to each other in terms of semantics.There is no overt predicate between the object and the state adjective.The state adjective occurs in other positions,which is the result of movement.Movement falls into two types,viz.object movement and state adjective movement.Object movement is prior to state adjective movement.In order to satisfy the requirement of feature checking,the object moves to the position NP.Then the state adjective moves to the major predicate and merges with it so as to maintain its semantic association with the state adjective and to serve the function of the complement.It follows that the difference between Chinese SOOAs and English as well as German SOOAs lies in the distance of movement of state adjectives.In Chinese,there are causative markers,resultative markers,and manner markers that can license the state adjective in the landing sites and help to maintain its semantic association with the object while in English and German there are no such markers.As a consequence,the object in Chinese-type SOOAs does not move while the state adjective moves out of the embedded VP to the empty verb position where the manner marker is inserted.The major predicate moves to the same position and merges with the newly-formed syntactic object ADJ-MANN.Furthermore,Chinese-type SOOAs allow the state adjective to precede the major predicate as the manner marker can license the state adjective.In contrast,in English-type SOOAs,neither the state adjective nor the object moves.Moreover,English-type SOOAs do not allow the state adjective to come before the major predicate because there is no manner marker to license it.

A Comparative Study of Adjective Nominalization in English and Chinese

It is generally recognized that nominalization, the use of a word which is not a noun as a noun, functions as a natural section of language, among which adjective nominalization serves as a requisite. This phenomenon can be frequently found in both Chinese and English. This paper comparatively studies adjective nominalization in the two languages, and discovers that the phenomenon in two languages shares similarities in syntactic functions, but differs in terms of the composition pattern in that formation in English is more various than Chinese, that is, in English it can be achieved either with or without the assistance of suffixes, yet that in Chinese is realized merely through zero suffixes.