請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/33856
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 蘇以文(I-wen Su) | |
dc.contributor.author | "Alvin Cheng-Hsien, Chen" | en |
dc.contributor.author | 陳正賢 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-13T05:47:33Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2006-07-18 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2006-07-18 | |
dc.date.issued | 2006 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2006-07-10 | |
dc.identifier.citation | AKHTAR, NAMEERA and TOMASELLO, MICHAEL. 1997. Young children's productivity with word order and verb morphology. Developmental Psychology, 33.952-65.
BAKER, M. C. 1989. Objects sharing and projection in serial verb constructions. Linguistic Inquiry, 9.17-48. BIQ, YUNG-O. 2001. The grammaticalization of Jiushi and Jiushishou in Mandarin Chinese. Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics, 27.53-74. —. 2004a. Construction, reanalysis, and stance: 'V yi ge N' and variations in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 36.1655-72. —. 2004b. People, things, and stuff: general nouns in spoken Mandarin. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 30.41-64. BYBEE, JOAN. 1985. Morphology: A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form: John Benjamins Publishing Company. —. 1998. The emergent lexicon. CLS, 34.421-35. —. 2002. Sequentiality as the basis of constituent structure. The evolution of language out of pre-language, ed. by T Givón and Bertram F. Malle, 109-34. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. —. 2003. Mechanisms of change in grammaticalization: the role of frequency. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, ed. by Brian D. Joseph and Richard D., 602-23. Malden: Blackwell. BYBEE, JOAN and SCHEIBMAN, JOANNE. 1999. The effect of usage on degree of constituency: the reduction of don't in American English. Linguistics, 37.575-96. BYBEE, JOAN and HOPPER, PAUL J. 2001. Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CHAFE, WALLACE (ed.) 1980. The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. —. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time: the flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CHU, CHAUNCEY CHENG-HSI. 1983. A reference grammar of Mandarin Chinese for English speakers. New York: Peter Lang. —. 1998. A discourse grammar of Mandarin Chinese. New York: Peter Lang. CHUANG, YUAN-HSUN. 2003. Sense Distinction of Verbs in English and Mandarin Chinese: An Analysis of the Verbs 'Set' and Bai3', National Taiwan University: MA Thesis. CHUI, KAWAI. 2000. Morphologization of the degree adverb HEN. Language and Linguistics, 1.45-59. —. 2003. Is the Correlation between Grounding and Transitivity Universal? Studies in Language, 27.221-44. COMRIE, BERNARD. 1978. Ergativity. Syntactic typology, ed. by Winfred P. Lehmann, 329-94. Austin: University of Texas Press. COUPER-KUHLEN, ELIZABETH and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 2000. Concessive patterns in conversation. Cause-Conditional-Concession-Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Bernd Kortmann, 381-410. Berlin/NY: Mouton de Gruyter. CROFT, WILLIAM. 1990. A conceptual framework for grammatical categories (or, a taxonomy of propositional acts ). Journal of Semantics, 7.245-79. —. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: the cognitive organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. —. 1995. Intonation units and grammatical structure. Linguistics, 33.839-82. —. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. —. 2005. Logical and typological arguments for Radical Construction Grammar. Construction grammar(s): Cognitive and cross-language dimensions, ed. by Mirjam Fried and Jan-Ola Östman. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CROFT, WILLIAM and CRUSE, D. ALAN. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CROWLEY, TERRY. 2002. Serial verb in Oceania: A descriptive typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DIESSEL, HOLGER. 2003. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure [Mar]. Journal of Linguistics, 39.167-72. DIXON, R.M.W. 1977. Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language, 1.1-80. —. 1979. Ergativity. Language, 55.59-74. —. 1984. The Semantic Basis of Syntactic Properties. Paper presented at Berkeley Linguistic Society, Berkeley. —. 1995. Complement clauses and complementation strategies. Grammar and meaning: Essays in honor of Sir John Lyons, ed. by F. R. Palmer, 175-220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DIXON, R.M.W. and AIKHENVALD, ALEXANDRA Y. (eds.) 2004. Adjective classes: a cross-linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOWTY, DAVID. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67.547-619. DRYER, MATTHEW S. 1997. Are grammatical relations universal? Esssays on Language Function and Language Type, ed. by John Bybee, John Haiman and Sandra A. Thompson, 115-43. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DU BOIS, JOHN W. 1985. Competing motivations. Iconicity in syntax, ed. by John Haiman. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. —. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language, 63.805-55. —. 2001. Discourse and grammar. The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure. vol. 2, ed. by Michael Tomasello. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. —. 2003. Argument structure: grammar in use. Preferred argument structure: grammar as architecture for function, ed. by John W. Du Bois, Lorraine E. Kumpf and William J. Ashby, 10-60. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DU BOIS, JOHN W., SCHUETZE-COBURN, STEPHAN, PAOLINO, DANAE and CUMMING, SUSANNA. 1993. Outline of discourse transcription. Talking data: Transcription and coding methods for language research, ed. by Jane A. Edwards and Martin D. Lampert, 45-89. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DURANTI, ALLESANDRO. 1986. The audience as co-author. Text, 6.239-47. DURIE, MARK. 1997. Grammatical structure in verb serialization. Complex predicate, ed. by Joan Alex and Peter Sells, 289-354. Stanford: CSLI. ENGLEBRETSON, ROBERT. 2003. Searching for structure: the problem of complementation in colloquial Indonesian conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ERMAN, BRITT and WARREN, BEATRICE. 2000. The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20.29-62. EWING, MICHAEL C. 2005. Hierarchical Constituency in Conversational Language. The Case of Cirebon Javanese. Studies in Language, 29.89-112. FILLMORE, CHARLES J. and ATKINS, BERYL T. 1992. Toward a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. Frames, Fields, and Contrasts, ed. by Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Feder Kittay, 75-102. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence. FILLMORE, CHARLES J., KAY, PAUL and O'CONNOR, MARY KAY. 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone. Language, 64.501-38. FORD, CECILIA E. 1993. Grammar in Interaction: Adverbial Clauses in American English Conversations. New York: Cambridge University Press. FORMAN, MICHAEL L. 1993. Verb serialization, word order typology, and Zamboangueño: A comparative approach. Oceanic Linguistics, 32.163-82. FRANCIS, ELAINE J. and MATTHEWS, STEPHEN. 2005. A multi-dimensional approach to the category 'verb' in Cantonese. Journal of Linguistics, 41.269-305. GARCÍA-MIGUEL, JOSÉ M. To appear. Clause structure and transitivity. Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics 29, ed. by Dirk Geeraerts and Hubert Cuykens. Oxford: Oxford University Press. GIVÓN, TALMY. 1979. Understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press. —. 1984. Syntax: A functional and typological introduction.vol. 1. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. —. 1991a. Isomorphism in the Grammatical Code: Cognitive and Biological Considerations. Studies in Language, 1.85-114. —. 1991b. Serial verbs and the mental reality of 'events:' Grammatical vs. cognitive package. Approaches to grammaticalization I: Focus on theoretical and methodological issues, ed. by E.C. Traugott and Bernd Heine, 81-127. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. —. 1993. English grammar: A function-based Introduction.vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. —. 2001. Syntax: An introduction.vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. GOLDBERG, ADELE E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press. —. 2006. Constructions at work: the nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. HAEGEMAN, LILIANE M. V. 1994. Introduction to Government and Binding Theory 2nd. ed. Oxford: Blackwell. HAIMAN, JOHN. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language, 59.781-819. HANSELL, MARK. 1993. Serial verbs and complement constructions in Mandarin: a clause linkage analysis. Advances in role and reference grammar, 197-233. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. HASPELMATH, MARTIN. 2002. The geometry of grammatical meaning: semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. The new psychology of language.vol.2, ed. by Michael Tomasello. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. HENGEVELD, KEES. 1992a. Non-verbal predication: theory, typology, diachrony. Berlin: Mouton de Gryuter. —. 1992b. Parts of speech. Layered structure and reference in a functional perspective, ed. by Peter Harder Fortescue and Lars Kristoffersen, 29-55. Amsterdam: Benjamins. HOPPER, PAUL J. 1987. Emergent grammar. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13.139-57. —. 1991. On some principles of grammaticalization. Approaches to Grammaticalization, ed. by Elizabeth C. Traugott and Bernd Heine, 17-35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. HOPPER, PAUL J. and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language, 56.251-99. —. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal grammar. Language, 60.703-52. HOPPER, PAUL J. and TRAUGOTT, ELIZABETH C. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. HUANG, CHU-REN, AHRENS, KATHLEEN, CHANG, LI-LI, CHEN, KEH-JIAN, LIU, MEI-CHUN and TSAI, MEI-CHI. 2000. The Module-Attribute Representation of Verbal Semantics: From Semantics to Argument Strcuture. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 5.19-46. HUANG, SHUANFAN. 2002. The pragmatics of focus in Tsou and Seediq. Language and Linguistics, 3.665-94. —. 2003. Doubts about complementation: A functionalist Analysis. Language and Linguistics, 4.429-55. HUANG, SHUANFAN and CHUI, KAWAI. 1997. Is Chinese a pragmatic order language? Chinese languages and linguistics, 4.51-79. HWANG, JYA-LIN. 2000. On grammaticalization in serial verb constructions in Chinese, University of Hawaii: Dissertation. JEFFERSON, GAIL. 1978. Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. Studies in the organization of conversational interaction, ed. by Jim Schenkein, 219-48. New York: Academic Press. KEMMER, SUZANNE. 1993. The middle voice. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. KOSHIK, IRENE. 2005. Beyond rhetorical questions: Assertive questions in everyday interaction. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. LAMBRECHT, KNUD. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Cambridge University Press. LANGACKER, RONALD W. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites.vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press. —. 1990. Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics, 1.5-38. —. 1991a. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar.vol. 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press. —. 1991b. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. —. 1999. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. LERNER, GENE. 1992. Assisted storytelling: Deploying shared knowledge as a practical matter. Qualitative Sociology, 15.247-71. LEVIN, BETH. 1993. Verb Classes and Alternation. Cambridge: MIT Press. LEVIN, BETH and HOVAV, MALKA RAPPAPORT. 1996. Lexical semantics and syntactic structure. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, ed. by Shalom Lappin, 487-507. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. LEVINSON, STEPHEN C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute Technology Press. LI, CHARLES N. and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A Functional Reference Grammar. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. LI, ING CHERRY 1999. Utterance-final particles in Taiwanese: A discourse-pragmatic analysis. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co. LIU, MEI-CHUN. 2002. Mandarin Verbal Semantics: A Corpus-based Approach. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co. LIU, YUEHUA, PAN, WENYU and GU, WEIZHU. 2001. Shiyong xiandai Hanyu yufa (Reference grammar of contemporary Mandarin). Beijing: Shang wu yin shu guan. MAYNARD, SENKO K. 2000. Speaking for the unspeakable: Expressive functions of nan(i) in Japanese discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 32.1209-39. MCCAWLEY, JAMES D. 1992. Justifying part-of-speech distinction in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 20.211-46. MULAC, ANTHONY and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of complementizer that in conversational Enlgish. Journal of Pragmatics, 15.237-51. ONO, TSUYOSHI and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. . 1995. What can conversation tell us about syntax? Descriptive and theoretical modes in the alternative linguistics, ed. by Philip W. Davis, 213-71. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. ÖSTMAN, JAN-OLA and FRIED, MIRJAM (eds.) 2005. Construction grammars: Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. PARK, JOSEPH SUNG-YUL. 2002. Cognitive and interactional motivations for the intonation unit. Studies in Language, 26.637-80. PAWLEY, A and SYDER, F. H. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. Language and communication, ed. by J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt. New York: Longman. PAYNE, THOMAS. EDWARD. 1997. Describing Morphosyntax: A Guide for Field Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. PU, MING-MING. 1997. Zero anaphora and grammatical relations in Mandarin. Grammatical relations: a functional perspective, ed. by T Givón, 281-322. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. RADFORD, ANDREW. 1988. Transformational Grammar: A First Course. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. 2004. Minimalist syntax: Exploring the structure of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. SAEED, JOHN I. 1997. Semantics. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. SCHEIBMAN, JOANNE. 2002. Point of View and Grammar: Structural patterns of subjectivity in American English conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. SCHWENTER, SCOTT A. 1998. The Pragmatics of Conditional Marking: Implicature, Scalarity, and Exclusivity, Stanford University: Dissertation. SCHWENTER, SCOTT A. and TRAUGOTT, ELIZABETH C. 2000. Invoking scalarity: The development of in fact Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 1.7-25. STASSEN, LEON. 1997. Intransitive predication. Oxford: Clarendon Press. SU, LILY I-WEN. 1998. Conversation coherence: the use of ranhou in Chinese spoken discourse. Collected Papers of the Second Interactional Symposium on Languages in Taiwan, 167-82. Taipei: Crane. —. 2004. Subjectification and the use of the complementizer SHUO. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 30.19-40. TALMY, LEONARD. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics Volume 1:Concept Structuring Systems. & Volume 2: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge: MIT Press. TAO, HONGYIN. 1996. Units in Mandarin conversation: prosody, discourse, and grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. —. 2001. Discovering the usual with corpora: the case of remember. Corpus linguistics in North America: Selections from the 1999 symposium, ed. by R. Simpson and J. Swales, 116-44. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. —. 2003. A usage-based approach to argument structure: 'remember' and 'forget' in spoken English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8.75-95. TAO, HONGYIN and THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 1994. The Discourse and Grammar Interface: Preferred Clause Structure in Mandarin Conversation [Oct]. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 29.1-34. TAO, HONGYIN and MCCARTHY, MICHAEL J. 2001. Understanding non-restrictive which-clauses in spoken English, which is not an easy thing. Language Sciences, 23.651-77. THOMPSON, SANDRA A. 1988. A discourse approach to the cross-linguistic category 'adjective'. Explanations for language universals, ed. by John Hawkins, 167-85. Basil: Blackwell. —. 1990. Information Flow and Dative Shift in English Discourse. Development and Diversity: Linguistic Variation across Time and Space., ed. by Jerrold Edmondson, Katherine Feagin and Peter Mühlhäusler, 239-53: Summer Institute of Linguistics. —. 2002. 'Object complements' and conversation: towards a realistic account. Studies in Language, 26.125-64. THOMPSON, SANDRA A. and HOPPER, PAUL J. 2001. Transitivity, Clause Structure, and Argument Structure: Evidence from Conversation. frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 27-60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. THOMPSON, SANDRA A. and COUPER-KUHLEN, ELIZABETH. 2005. The clause as a locus of grammar and interaction. Discourse Studies, 7.481-506. TOMASELLO, MICHAEL. 1998. Introduction: A cognitive-functional perspective on language structure. The new psychology of language: cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, ed. by Michael Tomasello, vii-xxiii. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. —. 2003. Constructing a language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition: Harvard University Press. —. 2006. Acquiring linguistic constructions. Handbook of child psychology: cognition, perception, and language, ed. by Robert Siegler and Deanna Kuhn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishers. TOMASELLO, MICHAEL, AKTAR, NAMEERA, DODSON, KELLY and REKAU, LAURA. 1997. Differential productivity in young children's use of nouns and verbs. Journal of Child Language, 24.373-87. TRAUGOTT, ELIZABETH C. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization. Subjectivity and subjectivisation: linguistic perspectives, ed. by Dieter Stein and Susan Wright, 31-54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. 1999. From subjectification to intersubjectification. Paper presented at Workshop on Historical Pragmatics, Fourteenth International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Vancouver, Canada. TRAUGOTT, ELIZABETH C. and DASHER, RICHARD B. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: CUP. WANG, YU-FANG. 1996. The Information Sequences of Adverbial Clauses in Chinese Spoken and Written Discourse, National Taiwan Normal University: Dissertation. —. 2002. The preferred information sequences of adverbial linking in Mandarin Chinese discourse. Text, 22.141-72. WOUK, FAY. 1986. Transitivity in Toba Batak and Tagalog. Studies in Language, 10.391-424. WRAY, ALISON. 1999. Formulaic language in learners and native speakers. Language Teaching, 32.213-31. —. 2002a. Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. 2002b. Dual processing in protolanguage: performance without competence. The transition to language, ed. by Alison Wray, 113-37. Oxford: Oxford University Press. WRAY, ALISON and PERKINS, MICHAEL R. 2000. The functions of formulaic language: an integrated model. Language and Communication, 20.1-28. ZHANG, BOJIANG and FANG, MEI. 1996. Han yu gong neng yu fa yan jiu (A study of Chinese functional grammar). Nanchang shi: Jiangxi jiaoyu chubanshe. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/33856 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 隨著語言學相關領域對於語境與語法之相互關係的重視,語法研究也逐漸強調如何在日常生活的溝通使用中,重新檢視語法結構。本文重點為子句中的「及物性 (Transitivity)」── 即該子句中動態事件由施事者 (agent) 傳導至受事者 (patient) 之程度。藉由分析三則漢語口語語料,本文旨在探究是否在口語語料當中有充分證據顯示「及物性」 為漢語子句中的必要句法範疇。根據Hopper and Thompson (1980) 所提出的「程度及物性 (Transitivity continuum)」概念,口語語料顯示漢語子句表現出強烈的「低及物性 (low Transitivity)」傾向。
根據漢語口語中的「低及物性」傾向,本文提出兩項理論上的建議。首先,本文發現言談會話者鮮少把「受事參與者」 (O-participants) 視為一個獨立的句法單位。文中強調,多數的「雙參與者(two-participant)」子句,例如含有動賓複合詞 (VO-compounds)、話輪序列傾向之格式(Sequence-sensitive formats)、或非動態性謂語 (non-kinetic predicates) 的子句,皆應被分析為「低及物性」子句,意即受事者於言談中扮演著邊緣性角色。此外,文中指出口語言談中的主觀性 (subjectivity)造成了低及物性子句的普遍;言談會話者鮮少客觀地報導事件,反而是主觀地用許多情感成分包裝自己對於現實事件的認知,在這樣的互動環境下,低及物性模組 (low-Transitive schema) 成為了言談會話者達成溝通目的最常使用的句型。 本文更進一步從語用觀點提出漢語詞類的解釋。依據「極端句構語法(Radical Construction Grammar)」以及「言談功能語法(discourse-functional grammar)」的發現,本文提出一個二度空間的語意構圖(Conceptual Map),此圖以兩個互相衝突的認知─語用原則為軸,用以解釋句法詞類的動態性;實際口語語料顯示過去普遍型態學 (universal-typology) 高估了言談中修飾功能 (modification) 的重要性。因此,本文認為說話者對於詞類的隱性知識 (implicit knowledge)應是不斷地受到語意和語用兩者相互衝突的影響,且必須經由適當的語境(discourse context)、句構(construction)才能夠賦予該詞一適當之詞類定義,而不同語言則會選擇一獨特方式來化解此語意─語用原則之間的衝突。本文認為從語用觀點所了解的動態語法結構,更能真實地勾勒出說話者的語法知識。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The increasing interest in the relation between discourse and grammar has heightened the centrality of studying grammatical patterns in their natural context of everyday interactional use. Of particular interest to the present study is the notion of Transitivity—a clausal property on a gradient understanding of the degree to which a kinetic event carries over from a volitional agent to an individuated patient. By looking at three conversational fragments in colloquial Mandarin, this study investigates if there is empirical evidence to justify Transitivity as a crucial syntactic property of clauses. Conversational data reveals that clauses in conversational Mandarin exhibit a strong bias toward the 'Low' end of the Transitivity continuum proposed in Hopper and Thompson (1980).
Two theoretical implications are drawn based on the low-Transitivity observed in conversational Mandarin. On the one hand, it is suggested that conversational participants rarely orient to the O-participants as a distinct syntactic category. A range of the two-participant clauses, such as those with VO-compounds or sequence-sensitive formats, or non-kinetic predicates, are argued to better be analyzed as low-transitive clauses, suggesting the peripheral status of O in discourse. On the other, it is proposed that subjectivity in conversational discourse gives rise to the recurring patterns of low Transitivity. Conversational participants rarely objectively report events, but subjectively package their perception of real-world events, with many affective factors involved. Under such interactional contexts emerge the recurring low-transitive schemas at the participants' disposal so as to achieve their communicative goals. Furthermore, an unprecedented step has been taken in hope to establish a realistic account of Mandarin speakers' grammatical representation. Drawing insights from Radical Construction Grammar and discourse-functional grammar, this study culminates in proposing a two-dimensional conceptual map with two competing cognitive-functional principles to capture the emergent nature of syntactic categories. An examination of how people talk has uncovered a hitherto overestimated use of (attributive) modification in universal-typological account for syntactic categories. Speakers' implicit knowledge about syntactic categories constantly interacts with these semantic and pragmatic motivations and different languages will resolve such conflicts in a language-particular way. It is hoped that this radical view of grammar will also be a more realistic sketch of our grammatical knowledge. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-13T05:47:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-95-R92142004-1.pdf: 785969 bytes, checksum: 8ed39be0fd3c588b86c036f7b431bf95 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Table of Contents
Acknowledgement i English Abstract iii Chinese Abstract v Table of Contents vii List of Tables xi List of Figures xii List of Figures xii Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.0 Preliminary 1 1.1 Transitivity in a formalist context 2 1.2 Transitivity in a cognitive-functional context 3 1.3 Clause structure in Mandarin 6 1.4 Research questions and hypothesis 8 1.5 An overview of the thesis 9 Chapter 2 Methodology 12 2.0 Introduction 12 2.1 The importance of data sources and collections 12 2.2 Cardinal Transitivity 15 2.2.1 Number of participant 16 2.2.2 Kinesis 17 2.2.3 Aspect 18 2.2.4 Punctuality 18 2.2.5 Mode 19 2.2.6 Volitionality and Agency 20 2.2.7 Affirmation 20 2.2.8 Individuation and affectedness of O 20 2.2.9 Affectedness 22 2.2.10 Interim summary 22 2.3 Operational definitions for 'clauses' 23 2.3.1 Simple clause and intonation unit 24 2.3.2 Unexpressed participants and verbal semantics 25 2.3.3 Verbal complex and semantic integration 28 2.3.4 Perception-Cognition-Utterance predicates 34 2.3.5 Grammaticization 36 2.3.6 Other subordinate clauses 39 2.3.7 Excluded tokens 41 2.4 Conclusion 42 Chapter 3 The degree of Transitivity and two-participant clauses 44 3.0 Introduction 44 3.1 Number of participant 45 3.1.1 The unexpressed participants 46 3.1.2 VO as low-transitive 1P predicate 51 3.1.2.1 VO compounds 52 3.1.2.2 Sequence-sensitive formats 54 3.1.3 Interim summary 57 3.2 Kinesis 58 3.2.1 Possessive constructions 61 3.2.2 Interim summary 63 3.3 Other Transitivity parameters 64 3.4 Conclusion 66 Chapter 4 Frequent clause type in conversation 68 4.0 Introduction 68 4.1 Reiteration of low Transitivity 69 4.2 Looking for frequent patterns 70 4.2.1 Event Concept Words 73 4.2.1.1 Activity and State predicates 74 4.2.1.2 PCU predicates 76 4.2.2 Property Concept Words 80 4.2.2.1 Subjective nature 80 4.2.2.2 Rare co-occurrence with copula 84 4.2.3 Object Concept Words 86 4.2.4 Minority cases 87 4.3 Conclusion 90 Chapter 5 Discourse and grammar 92 5.0 Introduction 92 5.1 Subjectivity and argument structure 92 5.2 Transitivity and argument structure 96 5.3 Conclusion 101 Chapter 6 A radical view of grammar 103 6.0 Introduction 103 6.1 Constructions as basic units of grammar 104 6.2 The controversy of syntactic category 108 6.2.1 Splitting, lumping, or discarding? 110 6.2.2 The need for syntactic categories? 113 6.2.3 Interim summary 114 6.3 The emergence of syntactic categories in Mandarin 115 6.3.1 Radical Construction Grammar proposal 116 6.3.2 Evidence from conversation 119 6.3.2.1 The emergence of Noun in Mandarin? Yes 120 6.3.2.2 The emergence of Verbs in Mandarin? Probably 122 6.3.2.3 The emergence of Adjective in Mandarin? No 125 6.3.3 Universals and Typology in conversational contexts 128 6.4 Conclusion 133 Chapter 7 Conclusion 134 References 139 Appendix: List of abbreviations 151 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 漢語中的及物性:從語用觀點看論元結構 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Transitivity in Mandarin: A Realistic Account of Argument Structure | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 94-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.coadvisor | Sandra A. Thompson(Sandra A. Thompson) | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃宣範(Shuanfan Huang),徐嘉慧(Kawai Chui) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 及物性,論元結構,範疇,詞類,句構語法, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Transitivity,argument structure,categorization,part of speech,radical construction grammar,interactional linguistics, | en |
dc.relation.page | 151 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2006-07-12 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 語言學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 語言學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-95-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 767.55 kB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。