{"title":"say动词真的通过从句组合语法化为补语吗?","authors":"Haiping Long, Chuanlin Deng","doi":"10.1075/fol.21023.den","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n When a ‘say’ clause is combined with a quoted-speech clause, one of two hypothetical pathways may be followed: (a)\n a complementation pathway on which the ‘say’ clause takes the quoted-speech clause as its complement clause and thus becomes its\n matrix clause; (b) a conjoining pathway which involves no syntactic operation but rather the loss of a prosodic gap between the\n two. Following the second pathway, ‘say’ may become grammaticalized into a quotative particle. On neither pathway is ‘say’\n grammaticalized into a complementizer. It is proposed that cross-linguistically so-called ‘say’ complementizers, including the\n alleged Chinese complementizer shuō, are more likely to be not complementizers but rather quotative\n particles.","PeriodicalId":44232,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do ‘say’ verbs really grammaticalize into complementizers through clause combination?\",\"authors\":\"Haiping Long, Chuanlin Deng\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/fol.21023.den\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n When a ‘say’ clause is combined with a quoted-speech clause, one of two hypothetical pathways may be followed: (a)\\n a complementation pathway on which the ‘say’ clause takes the quoted-speech clause as its complement clause and thus becomes its\\n matrix clause; (b) a conjoining pathway which involves no syntactic operation but rather the loss of a prosodic gap between the\\n two. Following the second pathway, ‘say’ may become grammaticalized into a quotative particle. On neither pathway is ‘say’\\n grammaticalized into a complementizer. It is proposed that cross-linguistically so-called ‘say’ complementizers, including the\\n alleged Chinese complementizer shuō, are more likely to be not complementizers but rather quotative\\n particles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44232,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Functions of Language\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Functions of Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.21023.den\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Functions of Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.21023.den","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do ‘say’ verbs really grammaticalize into complementizers through clause combination?
When a ‘say’ clause is combined with a quoted-speech clause, one of two hypothetical pathways may be followed: (a)
a complementation pathway on which the ‘say’ clause takes the quoted-speech clause as its complement clause and thus becomes its
matrix clause; (b) a conjoining pathway which involves no syntactic operation but rather the loss of a prosodic gap between the
two. Following the second pathway, ‘say’ may become grammaticalized into a quotative particle. On neither pathway is ‘say’
grammaticalized into a complementizer. It is proposed that cross-linguistically so-called ‘say’ complementizers, including the
alleged Chinese complementizer shuō, are more likely to be not complementizers but rather quotative
particles.
期刊介绍:
Functions of Language is an international journal of linguistics which explores the functionalist perspective on the organisation and use of natural language. It encourages the interplay of theory and description, and provides space for the detailed analysis, qualitative or quantitative, of linguistic data from a broad range of languages. Its scope is broad, covering such matters as prosodic phenomena in phonology, the clause in its communicative context, and regularities of pragmatics, conversation and discourse, as well as the interaction between the various levels of analysis. The overall purpose is to contribute to our understanding of how the use of languages in speech and writing has impacted, and continues to impact, upon the structure of those languages.