請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/60274
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 宋麗梅(Li-May Sung) | |
dc.contributor.author | Yi-Yang Cheng | en |
dc.contributor.author | 鄭奕揚 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-16T10:14:38Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2013-08-23 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2013-08-23 | |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2013-08-19 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Aikhenvald, Alexandra. Y. 2004. Evidentiality. Oxford University Press.
Anderson, Lloyd B. 1986. Evidentials, paths of change, and mental maps: typologically regular asymmetries. Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology, 273-312. Blust, Robert. 1998. Ca-reduplication and Proto-Austronesian grammar. Oceanic Linguistics, 37(1), 29-64. Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bybee, Joan. 1988. Semantic substance vs. contrast in the development of grammatical meaning. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 247-264. Bybee, Joan., and William Pagliuca. 1985. Cross-linguistic comparison and development of grammatical meaning. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.) Historical semantics, historical word formation, 59-83. Bybee, Joan, Perkins, Revere and William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. University of Chicago Press. Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischman (Eds.). 1995. Modality in grammar and discourse. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Bybee, Joan. 1998. “Irrealis” as a Grammatical Category. Anthropological Linguistics, 40(2), 257-271. Capell, Arthur, and H. E. Hinch. 1970. Maung Grammar: Texts and vocabulary. The Hague: Mouton. Chafe, Wallace. 1995. The realis-irrealis distinction in Caddo, the Northern Iroquoian languages, and English. In Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.) Modality in grammar and discourse, 32, 349. Chang, Henry.Y. 2006. The guest playing host: modifiers as matrix verbs in Kavalan. Clause Structure and Adjuncts in Austronesian Languages, eds. by Hans-Martin Gaertner et al., 43-82. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Chung, Sandra and Alan Timberlake. 1985. Tense, aspect, and mood. Language typology and syntactic description, Vol 3, 202-258. Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Croom Helm. Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Comire, Bernard. 1985. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Croft, William. 2002. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dancygier, Barbara. 1998. Conditionals and prediction: Time, knowledge and causation in conditional constructions. New York: Cambridge University Press. Dancygier, Barbara and Eve Sweetser. 2005. Mental spaces in grammar: conditional constructions. New York: Cambridge University Press. de Haan, Ferdinand. 1997. The interaction of negation and modality: A typological study. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California. de Haan, Ferdinand. 1999. Evidentiality and epistemic modality: setting boundaries. Southwest journal of linguistics 18(1), 83-101. de Haan, Ferdinand. 2006. Typological approaches to modality. In William Frawley (ed.).The expression of modality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. de Haan, Ferdinand. 2010. Building a semantic map: top-down versus bottom-up approaches. Linguistic Discovery 8(1), 102-117. Elliott, Jennifer R. 2000. Realis and irrealis: Forms and concepts of the grammaticalisation of reality. Linguistic Typology, 4(1), 55-90. Foley, William A. 1986. The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Cambridge University Press. Fleischman, Suzanne. 1989. Temporal distance: A basic linguistic metaphor. Studies in Language 13, 1-51 Frawley, William (Ed.). 2006. The expression of modality. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Givon, Talmy. 1984. Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Givon, Talmy. 1994. Irrealis and the subjunctive. Studies in language, 18(2), 265-337. Givon, Talmy. 2001. Syntax: An Introduction. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Cole, Peter and Jerry L. Morgan (eds.) Speech Acts (Syntax and semantics Vol. 3), 41-58. Haspelmath, Martin. (1997). The Geometry of grammatical meaning: semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.). The new psychology of language, Vol. 2, 211-242. Himmelmann, Nicholas. P. 2005. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: typological characteristics. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, 110-181. Hopper, Paul,. and Elizabeth, C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. New York: Cambridge University Press. Huang, Lillian M. 1994. Ergativity in Atayal. Oceanic Linguistics, 33(1), 129-43. Huang, Lillian M. 1995. A Study of Mayrinax Syntax. Taipei: Crane Publishing. Huang, Lillian M. 2000. Verb classification in Mayrinax Atayal. Oceanic Linguistics, 39(2), 364-390. Huang, Lillian M. 2001. Focus system of Mayrinax Atayal: A syntactic, semantic and pragmatic perspective. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Humanities & Social Science, 46, 51-69. Huang, Lillian M. 2002. Nominalization in Mayrinax Atayal. Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 197-225. Huang, Lillian M. 2008. Grammaticalization in Squliaq Atayal. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 34, 1-46. Huang, Shuanfan. 2005. Split O in Formosan Languages—A Localist Interpretation. Language and linguistics, 6(4), 783. Hsiao, Stella I-Ling. 2002. Adverbials in Squliq Atayal. Master thesis, National Tsing Hua University. Huddleston, Rodney. 1976. Some theoretical issues in the description of the English verb. Lingua, 40, 331-83. Kratzer, Angelika. 1978. Semantik der Rede. Konigstein: Scriptor. Kratzer, Angelika. 2012. Modals and conditionals: New and revised perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press. Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2, Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Liu, Dorinda, C. 2010. Complementation in three Formosan languages—Amis, Mayrinax Atayal and Tsou. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Hawai’i. Lu, Yu-An. 2005. Mayrinax phonology: with special reference to UM affixation. Doctoral dissertation, MA thesis. National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan. Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. New York: Cambridge University Press. Mithun, Marianne. 1995. On the relativity of irreality. In Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.) Modality in grammar and discourse, 367-388. Mithun, Marianne. 1999. The languages of Native North America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nuyts, Jan. 2006. Modality: overview and linguistic issues. The expression of modality ed. William Frawley. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Palmer, Frank R. 1986. Mood and Modality. New York: Cambridge University Press. Palmer, Frank R. 1987. The English verb. London and New York: Longman. Palmer, Frank R. 2001. Mood and Modality. New York: Cambridge University Press. Roberts, John R. 1990. Modality in Amele and other Papuan languages. Journal of linguistics, 26(02), 363-401. Sanders, Jose., and Wilbert Spooren. 1996. Subjectivity and certainty in epistemic modality: A study of Dutch epistemic modifiers. Cognitive Linguistics, 7(3), 241-264. Starosta, Stanely. 1999. Transitivity, ergativity, and the best analysis of Atayal case marking. In Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-Kuei Li (Eds.) Selected papers from the eighth international conference on Austronesian languages, 371-92. Taipei: Academia Sinica. Steele, Susan. 1975. Past and irrealis: just what does it all mean?. International Journal of American Linguistics, 41(3), 200-217. Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. New York: Cambridge University Press. Thompson, Sandra. A., and Anthony Mulac. 1991. The discourse conditions for the use of the complementizer that in conversational English. Journal of pragmatics, 15(3), 237-251. Talmy, Leonard. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive science, 12(1), 49-100. Traugott, Elizabeth. C. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language, 65(1), 31-55. Traugott, Elizabeth. C., and Dasher, Richard. B. 2002. Regularity in semantic change.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. van der Auwera, Johan., and Andreas Ammann. 2005. Overlap between situational and epistemic modal marking. In Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie (eds.) World Atlas of Language Structures, 310-313. van der Auwera, Johan., and Vladimir Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology, 2: 79-124. van der Auwera, Johan. 2008. In defense of classical semantic maps. Theoretical Linguistics, 34(1), 39-46. Van Valin, Robert D. 2004. An introduction to syntax. UK: Cambridge University Press. Wu, Chunming. 2012. Linking constructions in Mayrinax Atayal and Sinvaudjan Paiwan. Paper presented at the 19th Annual Meeting of the Austronesian Formal Linguistics Association. Academia Sinica, Taipei. Yeh, Maya Y., and Shuanfan Huang. 2009. A study of triple verb serialization in four Formosan languages. Oceanic Linguistics, 48(1), 78-110. Yeh, Marie M. 2012. From cognition to epistemic modality and to stance marking: semantic extension of ra:am ‘know’ in Saisiyat. Paper presented at the Workshop on epistemicity, evidentiality and attitude in Asian languages: Discourse, Diachronic and Typological Perspectives. Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong. Zeitoun, Elizabeth., Lillian. M. Huang and Marie M. Yeh. 1996. The temporal, aspectual and modal systems of some Formosan languages: a typological perspective. Oceanic Linguistics, 35(21), 21-56. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/60274 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 「情態」在語言學中相較於「時式」以及「動貌」在定義上為學者較難達成共識之範疇。而在台灣南島語研究中「情態」亦為較少被探究之議題,即使有所提及,也僅是從屬於其他語言結構上的議題來討論,其中包括:「對於未來概念的表達」、「狀語動詞的語意及結構」以及「連動式」等主題。有鑑於過去研究之不足,本篇論文旨在將汶水泰雅語中之「情態」看作完整的語言範疇─即「說者對於非實現事件以及命題之真假所表達的態度」─並探究該語中情態詞之語意、構詞句法以及類型學上之特徵。
本篇論文根據Palmer(2001)對情態範疇的分類,將汶水泰雅語中之情態詞分為兩類來探討:即表達「事件情態」以及表達「命題情態」之情態詞。在「事件情態」的部分,根據語意及結構上的特徵,該語有表達「參與者內部情態」以及表達「參與者外部情態」之區別。前者包括三個情態動詞以及一個情態派生前綴,即vaq『知道/能夠』、tahahuwayan『緩慢/能夠』、sumi’uwa’『欲求/想要』以及maki-『想要』。而後者包括三個句首述語,即musa’ valaiq『可以』、asi ki『必須』以及naki『應該』。至於命題情態的部分,該語有區別對於「認識性情態」以及「認識性距離」的表達。前者包含根據個人知識對可能性判斷之情態詞,即ini’ vaq’『可能』及ki’i『大概』,以及根據證據所作推論之情態詞,即tali ki『也許』及 asi ga『好像』。而後者包含在三種表達說者「與現實疏離」之語意情境下,連詞na以及naki『才會』的使用。 此外,本文將汶水泰雅語中之情態詞作跨語言類型學上的比較,其中參照了許多常見語言以及三個台灣南島語之情態詞。藉由語意地圖模型的使用,本文發現該語在兩大面向來說,對於情態表達在類型學上是較獨特的語言。首先,雖文獻中常探討情態詞的語意容易有一詞同時表多種情態語意的現象,但汶水泰雅語中卻只有一個情態詞展現這項特性,也就是跨語言常見的情態詞語意延伸的路徑幾乎無反應在在該語中。另外一方面,汶水泰雅語情態詞的系統和常見的英語類型的情態系統有很大的不同。因後者傾向由一組系統性地表達「事件情態」以及「命題情態」之詞彙所組成,而前者則是有兩組獨立的系統,其中一組表達「事件情態」,另一組表達「命題情態」。綜述以上兩點,汶水泰雅語並無反映跨語言常見的情態語意跨範疇(cross-domain function)現象,而是利用一組範疇特定(domain-specific function)之詞彙來表達情態。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | Modality is a linguistic category that is relatively more difficult to define than tense and aspect. In the study of Formosan langauges, it has also received scant attention, being subordinated under several topics, including (i) the expression of future, (ii) adverbial verbs, and (iii) verb serialization. The present thesis investigates modality as a coherent category in Mayrinax Atayal, a Formosan language spoken in the mountainous areas in Miaoli, Central Taiwan. It adopts the typological view on modality, which is defined as the expression of the speaker’s attitude toward irrealis events and the factual status of the proposition.
Based on Palmer’s (2001) typology of modal categories, two major types of modal expressions in Mayrinax Atayal are identified—those that fall under the category of Event modality, and those that fall under the category of Propositional modality. In the former category, Mayrinax shows seven modal expressions—(i) the expressions of Participant-internal modality, which consist of three verbs (vaq ‘know/be able’, tahahuwayan ‘slowly/be able’, and sumi’uwa’ ‘desire/want’) and a derivational prefix (maki- ‘want’), and (ii) those of Participant-external modality, which consist of three clause-initial predicates musa’ valaiq ‘may’, asi ki ‘must’, and naki ‘should’. In the latter category, the language shows seven other expressions—(i) the expressions of Epistemic modality (the knowledge-based ini’ vaqi ‘maybe’ and ki’i ‘probably’; and the evidence-based tali ki ‘perhaps’ and asi ga ‘seem’), and (ii) those of Epistemic distance (the complementizing linker na and naki ‘would’ in three contexts). With the employment of the semantic map model, modal expressions in Mayrinax Atayal are compared to those in familiar languages and in three other Formosan languages, which leads to the discovery that the language is typologically unique in two major aspects with regard to the expression of modality. First, the multifunctionality of modal expressions to encode more than one semantic domain of modality, which is commonly attested in the world’s languages, is only found in one modal expression in Mayrinax Atayal, which shows a poverty of sense extension from one modal meaning to another. Second, the widely attested tendency for individual modal expressions to have both an Event modal meaning and a Propositional modal meaning is not found in Mayrinax Atayal, the two categories appearing to serve as independent systems in the language. All in all, while an English-style modal system comprises of expressions that systematically reflect cross-domain relations, Mayrinax Atayal shows a system where modal expressions tend to serve domain-specific functions. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-16T10:14:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-101-R99142007-1.pdf: 2279802 bytes, checksum: 5271001b43b1bed84b57ceaba0f61a13 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | Acknowledgement i
English Abstract iii Chinese Abstract iv Table of Contents v List of Tables viii List of Figures ix List of Abbreviations x CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 Preliminary 1 1.1 Language Profile of Mayrinax Atayal 3 1.2 Grammar Sketch of Mayrinax Atayal 4 1.2.1 The Phonemic Inventory 4 1.2.2 Basic Clause Structure and the Voice System 6 1.2.3 The Case Marking System 11 1.2.4 The Pronominal System 13 1.2.5 Tense, Aspect, and the Irrealis Moods 16 1.3 Organization of the Thesis 22 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 23 2.0 Preliminary 23 2.1 Defining Modality 24 2.1.1 The Traditional Bottom-up Approach to Defining Modality 28 2.1.2 The Typological Top-down Approach to Defining Modality 32 2.1.3 Interim Summary 35 2.2 Modality in Formosan Languages 36 2.2.1 Modality and Future Expressions 36 2.2.2 Modality and Adverbial Verbs 38 2.2.3 Modality and Verb Serialization 42 2.2.4 Summary and Generalization 43 2.3 Conclusion 44 CHAPTER THREE EVENT MODALITY IN MAYRINAX ATAYAL 46 3.0 Introduction 46 3.1 Participant-internal Modality 46 3.1.1 Participant-internal Possibility 47 3.1.2 Participant-internal Desiderative 55 3.1.3 Interim Summary 61 3.2 Participant-external Modality 62 3.2.1 Participant-external Possibility 63 3.2.2 Participant-external Necessity 67 3.2.3 Summary 79 3.3 Conclusion 80 CHAPTER FOUR PROPOSITIONAL MODALITY IN MAYRINAX ATAYAL 85 4.0 Introduction 85 4.1 Epistemic Modality 86 4.1.1 Knowledge-based Epistemic Modality: Uncertainty and Supposition 88 4.1.2 Evidence-based Epistemic Modality: Weak and Strong Inference 93 4.1.3 Interim Summary 98 4.2 Epistemic Distance 100 4.2.1 Epistemic Distance in na-marked Complement Clauses 103 4.2.2 Epistemic Distance in the Main Clause 108 4.2.3 Epistemic Distance in Conditional Constructions 110 4.2.4 Summary 114 4.3 Conclusion 115 CHAPTER FIVE MODALITY IN MAYRINAX ATAYAL AND TYPOLOGICAL COMPARISON 118 5.0 Introduction 118 5.1 Typology and the Semantic Map Model 119 5.2 Possibility and Related Notions 122 5.2.1 The Semantic Map of Possibility 122 5.2.2 Possibility in Mayrinax Atayal and three Formosan Languages 125 5.3 Necessity and Related Notions 130 5.3.1 The Semantic Map of Necessity 131 5.3.2 Necessity, Desiderative, and Intention in Mayrinax Atayal and Comparison with Kanakanavu 134 5.4 Modality in Mayrinax Atayal: Towards a Typological Characterization 138 5.5 Conclusion 140 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION 142 6.0 Recapitulation 142 6.1 Typological Implications in Formosan Languages 145 6.1.1 Expressions of Modality Interact with Tense, Aspect, and Mood 145 6.1.2 Expressions of Modality Vary in Terms of Scope of Predication 146 6.1.3 Expressions of Modality Vary with regard to the Predicated Events/Propositions 146 6.2 Future Research 147 References 148 | |
dc.language.iso | en | |
dc.title | 汶水泰雅語情態詞探究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Modality in Mayrinax Atayal | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 101-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 連金發(Chinfa Lien),葉美利(Mei-Li Yeh) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 情態,汶水泰雅語,語言類型學,非實現貌, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | modality,Mayrinax Atayal,linguistic typology,irrealis, | en |
dc.relation.page | 153 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2013-08-19 | |
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-101-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.23 MB | 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。