基于对等性的极量触发结构研究
|
摘要
本文以当代汉语新兴程度极量构式"不能更X"为例,基于语法复制中的对等性因素论证其与英语"couldn't be+X的比较级"之间的复制关系,并探讨该构式极量语义触发的条件及其类型学意义。从对等性来看,两个构式的结构和语义对等,存在语法复制关系的可能性。构式之外,can/could和"能"语义不对等。表示认知可能性是can/could的常规义项,因此"couldn't be+X的比较级"可以表示不可能存在更高量,进而触发极量义;汉语"能"尚未发展出认知可能性这一义项,难以触发构式的极量义,其极量义复制于英语。可见,can/could和"能"是否表示认知可能性,是构式极量语义能否被触发的关键。跨语言调查结果进一步论证了构式极量语义触发条件的类型学意义。
Taking the emerging maximal degree construction"buneng geng X"in contemporary Chinese as an example, this paper aims to explore the maximal degree trigger of the construction and its typological significance on the basis of grammar replication between the construction in Chinese and"couldn't be + comparative form"in English. Given their structural and semantic equivalence, there is the possibility of grammatical replication between them. Yet"can/could"and neng are not totally equal in meaning. In English, can/could has a sense of epistemic possibility, and"couldn't be + comparative form"can express the meaning that a higher degree cannot possibly exist, thereby triggering the subjective meaning of maximal degree. In contrast, neng in modern Chinese cannot express epistemic possibility. Therefore, the maximal degree sense of"buneng geng X"is not triggered by neng, but replicates its English equivalent instead. It is further confirmed that epistemic possibility is the key trigger of the maximal degree construction.
Taking the emerging maximal degree construction"buneng geng X"in contemporary Chinese as an example, this paper aims to explore the maximal degree trigger of the construction and its typological significance on the basis of grammar replication between the construction in Chinese and"couldn't be + comparative form"in English. Given their structural and semantic equivalence, there is the possibility of grammatical replication between them. Yet"can/could"and neng are not totally equal in meaning. In English, can/could has a sense of epistemic possibility, and"couldn't be + comparative form"can express the meaning that a higher degree cannot possibly exist, thereby triggering the subjective meaning of maximal degree. In contrast, neng in modern Chinese cannot express epistemic possibility. Therefore, the maximal degree sense of"buneng geng X"is not triggered by neng, but replicates its English equivalent instead. It is further confirmed that epistemic possibility is the key trigger of the maximal degree construction.
引文
Aikhenvald, A. Y. 2002. Language Contact in Amazonia. New York:Oxford University Press.
Dyer, M.&M. Haspelmath. 2013. The world Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig:Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Fauconnier, G. 1975. Polarity and the scale principle. Chicago Linguistic Society 11:188-199.
Golab, Z. 1959. Some Arumanian-Macedonian isogrammatisms and the social background of their development. Word 15(4):15-35.
Guo, Hongjie(郭鸿杰)&Han, Hong(韩红). 2012. A corpus-based study of English-Chinese language contact:A case study of bei(被)passives. Foreign Language Teaching and Research(3):359-370.[2012,语料库驱动的英汉语言接触研究:以“被”字句为例.《外语教学与研究》第3期:359-370.]
Harris, A. C.&L. Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, M., M. Dryer, D. Gil&B. Comrie. 2005. The World Atlas of Language Structures.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Heine, B.&T. Kutava. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Heine, B.&T. Kuteva. 2008. Constraints on contact-induced linguistic change. Journal of Language Contact THEMA(2):57-90.
Li, Rulong(李如龙). 2013. Research on language contact:Types, methods, and process. Nationalities Research in Qinghai(4):163-166.[2013,论语言接触的类型、方式和过程.《青海民族研究》第4期:163-166.]
Liao, Qiaoyun(廖巧云)&Jiang, Yong(蒋勇). 2013. The emergent polarity of quantifying superlatives. Foreign Language Teaching and Research(4):505-517.[2013,量化最高级涌现性极性特征研究.《外语教学与研究》第4期:505-517.]
Lord, C. D. 1993. Historical Change in Serial Verb Constructions. Amsterdam, Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Pan, Zaiping(潘再平)编. 2000. A New German-Chinese Dictionary. Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House.[2000,《新德汉词典》《(德汉词典》修订本).上海:上海译文出版社.]
Song, Wenjun(宋文军)编. 1992. Modern Japanese-Chinese Dictionary. Beijing:The Commercial Press.[1992,《现代日汉大词典》.北京:中国商务印书馆、日本小学馆.]
Winford, D. 2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford:Blackwell.
Wu, Fuxiang(吴福祥). 2009. The changes and variations in the word order of verb, object and complement in the minority language in southern China. Nankai Linguistics(2):59-73.[2009,南方民族语言动宾补语序的演变和变异.《南开语言学刊》第2辑:59-73.]
Wu, Fuxiang(吴福祥). 2013. On the mechanisms of grammatical change. Research in Ancient Chinese Language(3):59-71.[2013,关于语法演变的机制.《古汉语研究》第3期:59-71.]
Zhang, Tianyu(张天宇)&Zhou, Guijun(周桂君). 2016. Lexical borrowing from Chinese in English in modern times from the linguistic contact perspective. Foreign Language Research(1):54-57.[2016,近现代中英语言接触与汉语词汇借用.《外语学刊》第1期:54-57.]
1文中新兴构式的例句来自百度搜索(包括新闻、报道、贴吧、广告等)和北京语言大学BCC语料库(BCC),现代汉语例句来自北京大学语料库(CCL),为节省篇幅,除特殊情况外,文中所引例句一般不标注具体出处。外语例句一部分来自相关词典,标注出处,一部分来自该语言母语者的内省。
2《世界语言结构图册》(The World Atlas of Language Structures,简称为WALS, Haspelmath et al. 2005;Dryer&Haspelmath 2013)对认知可能性(epistemic possibility)和情景可能性(situational possibility)进行了区分,此处观点引自该图册。同时WALS指出situational possibility是指说话人仅仅描述存在于既定情景中的可能性,如“One can get to Staten Island using the ferry.”
3参照“形容词的比较级”主要表达性状程度量的更高级,此处暂且将动作量的增量称为“动词的比较级”。
4越南语cóth?可以表示能力,也可以表示认知可能性,在“不能更X”的相应结构中có常常省略,多表述为“kh?ng th?X h?n”。
Dyer, M.&M. Haspelmath. 2013. The world Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig:Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
Fauconnier, G. 1975. Polarity and the scale principle. Chicago Linguistic Society 11:188-199.
Golab, Z. 1959. Some Arumanian-Macedonian isogrammatisms and the social background of their development. Word 15(4):15-35.
Guo, Hongjie(郭鸿杰)&Han, Hong(韩红). 2012. A corpus-based study of English-Chinese language contact:A case study of bei(被)passives. Foreign Language Teaching and Research(3):359-370.[2012,语料库驱动的英汉语言接触研究:以“被”字句为例.《外语教学与研究》第3期:359-370.]
Harris, A. C.&L. Campbell. 1995. Historical Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Haspelmath, M., M. Dryer, D. Gil&B. Comrie. 2005. The World Atlas of Language Structures.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Heine, B.&T. Kutava. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Heine, B.&T. Kuteva. 2008. Constraints on contact-induced linguistic change. Journal of Language Contact THEMA(2):57-90.
Li, Rulong(李如龙). 2013. Research on language contact:Types, methods, and process. Nationalities Research in Qinghai(4):163-166.[2013,论语言接触的类型、方式和过程.《青海民族研究》第4期:163-166.]
Liao, Qiaoyun(廖巧云)&Jiang, Yong(蒋勇). 2013. The emergent polarity of quantifying superlatives. Foreign Language Teaching and Research(4):505-517.[2013,量化最高级涌现性极性特征研究.《外语教学与研究》第4期:505-517.]
Lord, C. D. 1993. Historical Change in Serial Verb Constructions. Amsterdam, Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Pan, Zaiping(潘再平)编. 2000. A New German-Chinese Dictionary. Shanghai:Shanghai Translation Publishing House.[2000,《新德汉词典》《(德汉词典》修订本).上海:上海译文出版社.]
Song, Wenjun(宋文军)编. 1992. Modern Japanese-Chinese Dictionary. Beijing:The Commercial Press.[1992,《现代日汉大词典》.北京:中国商务印书馆、日本小学馆.]
Winford, D. 2003. An Introduction to Contact Linguistics. Oxford:Blackwell.
Wu, Fuxiang(吴福祥). 2009. The changes and variations in the word order of verb, object and complement in the minority language in southern China. Nankai Linguistics(2):59-73.[2009,南方民族语言动宾补语序的演变和变异.《南开语言学刊》第2辑:59-73.]
Wu, Fuxiang(吴福祥). 2013. On the mechanisms of grammatical change. Research in Ancient Chinese Language(3):59-71.[2013,关于语法演变的机制.《古汉语研究》第3期:59-71.]
Zhang, Tianyu(张天宇)&Zhou, Guijun(周桂君). 2016. Lexical borrowing from Chinese in English in modern times from the linguistic contact perspective. Foreign Language Research(1):54-57.[2016,近现代中英语言接触与汉语词汇借用.《外语学刊》第1期:54-57.]
1文中新兴构式的例句来自百度搜索(包括新闻、报道、贴吧、广告等)和北京语言大学BCC语料库(BCC),现代汉语例句来自北京大学语料库(CCL),为节省篇幅,除特殊情况外,文中所引例句一般不标注具体出处。外语例句一部分来自相关词典,标注出处,一部分来自该语言母语者的内省。
2《世界语言结构图册》(The World Atlas of Language Structures,简称为WALS, Haspelmath et al. 2005;Dryer&Haspelmath 2013)对认知可能性(epistemic possibility)和情景可能性(situational possibility)进行了区分,此处观点引自该图册。同时WALS指出situational possibility是指说话人仅仅描述存在于既定情景中的可能性,如“One can get to Staten Island using the ferry.”
3参照“形容词的比较级”主要表达性状程度量的更高级,此处暂且将动作量的增量称为“动词的比较级”。
4越南语cóth?可以表示能力,也可以表示认知可能性,在“不能更X”的相应结构中có常常省略,多表述为“kh?ng th?X h?n”。