类似的是方式,比较的是数量(除非它们不是)

Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1515/opli-2022-0211
R. Giomi
{"title":"类似的是方式,比较的是数量(除非它们不是)","authors":"R. Giomi","doi":"10.1515/opli-2022-0211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article proposes a fine-grained semantic analysis of similative and comparative constructions within the framework of Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG). The core idea is that, when used in their prototypical modifying functions, the two types of constructions are built upon two semantic frames that share an identical structure but differ as regards the semantic category that underlies the whole modifying expression – whence the title of the article: similatives are Manners and comparatives are Quantities. At the same time, I argue that similatives can also be put to modifying and predicative uses in which they do not express a Manner but a Configurational Property (i.e., a “nuclear predication”) and that comparatives do not express a Quantity when occurring as arguments of lexical(ized) ditransitive predicates like prefer or would rather, nor when the two terms of the comparison are introduced by a specific type of temporal expression. Finally, the paper refines previous FDG approaches to the alternation between analytic and synthetic expression of comparison in such languages as English and Latin, proposing that the English comparative suffix -er is liable to being modified by narrow-scope measure expressions and is therefore a partly lexical element and not a fully grammaticalized marker of comparison.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Similatives are Manners, comparatives are Quantities (except when they aren’t)\",\"authors\":\"R. Giomi\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/opli-2022-0211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article proposes a fine-grained semantic analysis of similative and comparative constructions within the framework of Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG). The core idea is that, when used in their prototypical modifying functions, the two types of constructions are built upon two semantic frames that share an identical structure but differ as regards the semantic category that underlies the whole modifying expression – whence the title of the article: similatives are Manners and comparatives are Quantities. At the same time, I argue that similatives can also be put to modifying and predicative uses in which they do not express a Manner but a Configurational Property (i.e., a “nuclear predication”) and that comparatives do not express a Quantity when occurring as arguments of lexical(ized) ditransitive predicates like prefer or would rather, nor when the two terms of the comparison are introduced by a specific type of temporal expression. Finally, the paper refines previous FDG approaches to the alternation between analytic and synthetic expression of comparison in such languages as English and Latin, proposing that the English comparative suffix -er is liable to being modified by narrow-scope measure expressions and is therefore a partly lexical element and not a fully grammaticalized marker of comparison.\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-0211\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-0211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要本文在功能语篇语法的框架下,对比喻结构和比较结构进行了细致的语义分析。核心思想是,当用于它们的原型修饰功能时,这两种类型的结构建立在两个语义框架上,这两个框架共享相同的结构,但在构成整个修饰表达的语义类别方面有所不同 – 这篇文章的标题是:比喻是方式,比喻是数量。同时,我认为,比喻也可以用于修饰和表语用途,在这些用途中,它们不表达一种方式,而是一种配置属性(即“核预测”),并且当比较词作为词汇(化)双及物谓词的自变量出现时,它们不表示数量,比如prefer或would,也不是当比较的两个项由特定类型的时间表达式引入时。最后,本文对英语和拉丁语等语言中比较的分析表达和合成表达之间的交替进行了改进,提出英语比较后缀-er容易被狭义测度表达所修饰,因此是一个部分词汇元素,而不是一个完全语法化的比较标记。
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
Similatives are Manners, comparatives are Quantities (except when they aren’t)
Abstract This article proposes a fine-grained semantic analysis of similative and comparative constructions within the framework of Functional Discourse Grammar (FDG). The core idea is that, when used in their prototypical modifying functions, the two types of constructions are built upon two semantic frames that share an identical structure but differ as regards the semantic category that underlies the whole modifying expression – whence the title of the article: similatives are Manners and comparatives are Quantities. At the same time, I argue that similatives can also be put to modifying and predicative uses in which they do not express a Manner but a Configurational Property (i.e., a “nuclear predication”) and that comparatives do not express a Quantity when occurring as arguments of lexical(ized) ditransitive predicates like prefer or would rather, nor when the two terms of the comparison are introduced by a specific type of temporal expression. Finally, the paper refines previous FDG approaches to the alternation between analytic and synthetic expression of comparison in such languages as English and Latin, proposing that the English comparative suffix -er is liable to being modified by narrow-scope measure expressions and is therefore a partly lexical element and not a fully grammaticalized marker of comparison.
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
×
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