时间框架对古典阿拉伯语回指指示语可及性的影响

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Topics in Linguistics Pub Date : 2018-12-01 DOI:10.2478/topling-2018-0010
Samer Jarbou
{"title":"时间框架对古典阿拉伯语回指指示语可及性的影响","authors":"Samer Jarbou","doi":"10.2478/topling-2018-0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The aim of this paper is to investigate the determinants for choosing nominal anaphoric demonstratives in Classical Arabic (CA) by examining their usage in a corpus of CA texts. The study makes use of Ariel’s (1990; 2001) concept of ‘unity’ as a theoretical framework from which to study the relationship between an anaphoric demonstrative, its antecedent and their shared referent. This study builds on Jarbou and Migdady’s (2012) findings that ‘anaphoric distance’ (Ariel, 1990; 2001) has not been found to be a primary determinant of cognitive accessibility concerning the use of anaphoric demonstratives in CA. The results of this study show that the choice of proximal/distal anaphoric demonstratives in CA depends primarily on the ‘time frame’ of the referent. Anaphoric demonstratives are temporally anchored in the present time of interaction; if a referent existed within a past time frame or is expected to exist within a future time frame (in relation to the interlocutors’ present time), that referent has low accessibility because of non-sharedness of time frame; if a referent existed or is experienced within a present time frame, it has high accessibility due to sharedness of time frame. Temporal distance replaces physical distance as a determinant of accessibility. In the corpus, proximal anaphoric demonstratives have been used in contexts of high accessibility while distal anaphors have been used in those of low accessibility. Findings of this study contribute to the dynamic view of demonstratives that textual/physical distance is not the primary or sole determinant of accessibility concerning demonstratives.","PeriodicalId":41377,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Linguistics","volume":"19 1","pages":"57 - 71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Time frame as a determinant of accessibility of anaphoric demonstratives in Classical Arabic\",\"authors\":\"Samer Jarbou\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/topling-2018-0010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The aim of this paper is to investigate the determinants for choosing nominal anaphoric demonstratives in Classical Arabic (CA) by examining their usage in a corpus of CA texts. The study makes use of Ariel’s (1990; 2001) concept of ‘unity’ as a theoretical framework from which to study the relationship between an anaphoric demonstrative, its antecedent and their shared referent. This study builds on Jarbou and Migdady’s (2012) findings that ‘anaphoric distance’ (Ariel, 1990; 2001) has not been found to be a primary determinant of cognitive accessibility concerning the use of anaphoric demonstratives in CA. The results of this study show that the choice of proximal/distal anaphoric demonstratives in CA depends primarily on the ‘time frame’ of the referent. Anaphoric demonstratives are temporally anchored in the present time of interaction; if a referent existed within a past time frame or is expected to exist within a future time frame (in relation to the interlocutors’ present time), that referent has low accessibility because of non-sharedness of time frame; if a referent existed or is experienced within a present time frame, it has high accessibility due to sharedness of time frame. Temporal distance replaces physical distance as a determinant of accessibility. In the corpus, proximal anaphoric demonstratives have been used in contexts of high accessibility while distal anaphors have been used in those of low accessibility. Findings of this study contribute to the dynamic view of demonstratives that textual/physical distance is not the primary or sole determinant of accessibility concerning demonstratives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Topics in Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"57 - 71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Topics in Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2018-0010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2018-0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要本文旨在通过考察古典阿拉伯语语料库中名义回指指示语的使用情况,探讨其选择的决定因素。该研究利用了Ariel (1990;2001)“统一”的概念作为一个理论框架,从中研究回指指示物、先行词和它们的共同指称物之间的关系。本研究基于Jarbou和Migdady(2012)的发现,即“回指距离”(Ariel, 1990;(2001)并没有被发现是在CA中使用回指指示语的认知可及性的主要决定因素。本研究的结果表明,CA中近端/远端回指指示语的选择主要取决于指称物的“时间框架”。回指指示语在时间上锚定在互动的当下;如果一个指称物在过去的时间范围内存在,或者预计在未来的时间范围内存在(相对于对话者现在的时间),由于时间范围的非共享性,该指称物的可及性较低;如果在当前时间框架内存在或经历过一个参照,则由于时间框架的共享性,它具有高可访问性。时间距离取代物理距离作为可达性的决定因素。在语料库中,近端回指指用于高可及性语境,远端回指用于低可及性语境。本研究的结果支持指示语的动态观点,即文本/物理距离不是指示语可及性的主要或唯一决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Time frame as a determinant of accessibility of anaphoric demonstratives in Classical Arabic
Abstract The aim of this paper is to investigate the determinants for choosing nominal anaphoric demonstratives in Classical Arabic (CA) by examining their usage in a corpus of CA texts. The study makes use of Ariel’s (1990; 2001) concept of ‘unity’ as a theoretical framework from which to study the relationship between an anaphoric demonstrative, its antecedent and their shared referent. This study builds on Jarbou and Migdady’s (2012) findings that ‘anaphoric distance’ (Ariel, 1990; 2001) has not been found to be a primary determinant of cognitive accessibility concerning the use of anaphoric demonstratives in CA. The results of this study show that the choice of proximal/distal anaphoric demonstratives in CA depends primarily on the ‘time frame’ of the referent. Anaphoric demonstratives are temporally anchored in the present time of interaction; if a referent existed within a past time frame or is expected to exist within a future time frame (in relation to the interlocutors’ present time), that referent has low accessibility because of non-sharedness of time frame; if a referent existed or is experienced within a present time frame, it has high accessibility due to sharedness of time frame. Temporal distance replaces physical distance as a determinant of accessibility. In the corpus, proximal anaphoric demonstratives have been used in contexts of high accessibility while distal anaphors have been used in those of low accessibility. Findings of this study contribute to the dynamic view of demonstratives that textual/physical distance is not the primary or sole determinant of accessibility concerning demonstratives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Topics in Linguistics
Topics in Linguistics LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
The semantic complexity of Hausa kinship terms The mental consideration of resilience as a relevant social concept (a corpus-based research of American English) Austin in the Lab: Empirically reconsidering the constative-performative distinction The ADV speaking-construction in American English: A quantitative corpus-based investigation The morphological and syntactic functions of Dagbani nominal suffixes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1