{"title":"限定性和汉语主句","authors":"R. Sybesma","doi":"10.1075/ijchl.19002.syb","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n 本文通过对含有光杆动宾结构和体标记的汉语非自足句的考察，提出这些句子不合法的原因在于它们都是非限定句。在对非限定句做出的功能定义的基础上，本文指出事件句的时间理解需要三类抽象“时间”，即事件时间（Situation Time, SitT），声称/指称时间（Topic/Reference Time, TT），和说话时间（Utterance Time, UT）。在此基础上，我们进一步指出限定句的骨架的必有成分包括 CP, TP, AspP 和 VP（即 VP-e）。因此，本文讨论的句子之所以不合法，可以归因于骨架的不完整。同时，本文也检验了几种修补该类句子的手段，指出其目的多是加强了谓语的潜在的事件性，以满足限定事件句骨架的需要。由此，本文提出了一种分析汉语非自足句的新的理论框架。","PeriodicalId":41020,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"限定性和汉语主句\",\"authors\":\"R. Sybesma\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/ijchl.19002.syb\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n 本文通过对含有光杆动宾结构和体标记的汉语非自足句的考察，提出这些句子不合法的原因在于它们都是非限定句。在对非限定句做出的功能定义的基础上，本文指出事件句的时间理解需要三类抽象“时间”，即事件时间（Situation Time, SitT），声称/指称时间（Topic/Reference Time, TT），和说话时间（Utterance Time, UT）。在此基础上，我们进一步指出限定句的骨架的必有成分包括 CP, TP, AspP 和 VP（即 VP-e）。因此，本文讨论的句子之所以不合法，可以归因于骨架的不完整。同时，本文也检验了几种修补该类句子的手段，指出其目的多是加强了谓语的潜在的事件性，以满足限定事件句骨架的需要。由此，本文提出了一种分析汉语非自足句的新的理论框架。\",\"PeriodicalId\":41020,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Chinese Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.19002.syb\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"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 Chinese Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/ijchl.19002.syb","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
This article examines Chinese non self sufficient sentences containing bare pole verb object structures and aspect markers, and proposes that the reason why these sentences are illegal is that they are all non finite sentences. Based on the functional definition of non finite sentences, this article points out that the understanding of time in event sentences requires three types of abstract "time", namely, Situation Time (SitT), Topic/Reference Time (TT), and Utterance Time (UT). On this basis, we further point out that the essential components of the skeleton of a finite sentence include CP, TP, AspP, and VP (i.e. VP-e). Therefore, the illegality of the sentences discussed in this article can be attributed to the incompleteness of the skeleton. At the same time, this article also examines several methods for repairing such sentences, pointing out that their purpose is mostly to enhance the potential eventuality of the predicate to meet the needs of the skeleton of finite event sentences. Therefore, this article proposes a new theoretical framework for analyzing Chinese non self sufficient sentences.
本文通过对含有光杆动宾结构和体标记的汉语非自足句的考察，提出这些句子不合法的原因在于它们都是非限定句。在对非限定句做出的功能定义的基础上，本文指出事件句的时间理解需要三类抽象“时间”，即事件时间（Situation Time, SitT），声称/指称时间（Topic/Reference Time, TT），和说话时间（Utterance Time, UT）。在此基础上，我们进一步指出限定句的骨架的必有成分包括 CP, TP, AspP 和 VP（即 VP-e）。因此，本文讨论的句子之所以不合法，可以归因于骨架的不完整。同时，本文也检验了几种修补该类句子的手段，指出其目的多是加强了谓语的潜在的事件性，以满足限定事件句骨架的需要。由此，本文提出了一种分析汉语非自足句的新的理论框架。
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
