{"title":"汉语中的日期交替","authors":"Dong Zhang, Jiajin Xu","doi":"10.1075/ijcl.21086.zha","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis study investigates the factors significantly constraining dative alternation in Chinese by adopting mixed-effects logistic regression modelling. The analysis showed that such factors significantly affected the choice of dative variants in Chinese, including the animacy, pronominality, and definiteness of the recipient, the accessibility and concreteness of the theme, and the length difference between the theme and the recipient. Findings were compared with those for the English dative alternation discussed in the literature. When the theme was recoverable from context or shorter than the recipient, the prepositional dative construction was preferred in both English and Chinese. This can be explained by the principles of end-focus and end-weight. However, when the recipient was animate or definite, the double object construction was preferred in English, while the prepositional dative construction was more likely to be used in Chinese. This divergence is due to the different syntactic and semantic features of their recipient markers.","PeriodicalId":46843,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dative alternation in Chinese\",\"authors\":\"Dong Zhang, Jiajin Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/ijcl.21086.zha\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis study investigates the factors significantly constraining dative alternation in Chinese by adopting mixed-effects logistic regression modelling. The analysis showed that such factors significantly affected the choice of dative variants in Chinese, including the animacy, pronominality, and definiteness of the recipient, the accessibility and concreteness of the theme, and the length difference between the theme and the recipient. Findings were compared with those for the English dative alternation discussed in the literature. When the theme was recoverable from context or shorter than the recipient, the prepositional dative construction was preferred in both English and Chinese. This can be explained by the principles of end-focus and end-weight. However, when the recipient was animate or definite, the double object construction was preferred in English, while the prepositional dative construction was more likely to be used in Chinese. This divergence is due to the different syntactic and semantic features of their recipient markers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46843,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.21086.zha\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.21086.zha","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates the factors significantly constraining dative alternation in Chinese by adopting mixed-effects logistic regression modelling. The analysis showed that such factors significantly affected the choice of dative variants in Chinese, including the animacy, pronominality, and definiteness of the recipient, the accessibility and concreteness of the theme, and the length difference between the theme and the recipient. Findings were compared with those for the English dative alternation discussed in the literature. When the theme was recoverable from context or shorter than the recipient, the prepositional dative construction was preferred in both English and Chinese. This can be explained by the principles of end-focus and end-weight. However, when the recipient was animate or definite, the double object construction was preferred in English, while the prepositional dative construction was more likely to be used in Chinese. This divergence is due to the different syntactic and semantic features of their recipient markers.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Corpus Linguistics (IJCL) publishes original research covering methodological, applied and theoretical work in any area of corpus linguistics. Through its focus on empirical language research, IJCL provides a forum for the presentation of new findings and innovative approaches in any area of linguistics (e.g. lexicology, grammar, discourse analysis, stylistics, sociolinguistics, morphology, contrastive linguistics), applied linguistics (e.g. language teaching, forensic linguistics), and translation studies. Based on its interest in corpus methodology, IJCL also invites contributions on the interface between corpus and computational linguistics.