并列•关联•比较成分话题化 —The More X, the More Y构式认知研究
Coordination, Correlation and Topicalization—A Cognitive Study of the More X, the More Y Construction
DOI: 10.12677/ML.2017.53028, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 1,682  浏览: 3,591  科研立项经费支持
作者: 张立昌 :曲阜师范大学外国语学院,山东 曲阜
关键词: 构式并列关联话题化Construction Coordination Correlation Topicalization
摘要: Fillmore et al. (1988) 指出the more X, the more Y是一个能产的形式化习语,Cullicover & Jackendoff (1999)等通过对该结构的分析认为它是一个“独具一格”的构式,不能用原则参数的框架进行分析,这一论断引起了众多研究者的关注。本文在已有研究的基础上,根据构式语法的观点,认为the more X, the more Y是一个形式并列、意义关联、比较成分话题化的并联话题构式,并进一步提出该构式的许多特征都与构式的形式与意义之间互动有关。
Abstract: Fillmore et al. (1988) point out that the more X, the more Y is a productive formal idiom; Cullicover & Jackendoff (1999) argue that the more X, the more Y is a sui generic and cannot be analyzed within the principle and parameter paradigm. This claim arouses the attention of researchers from different linguistic fields. Based on previous studies, this paper considers the more X, the more Y as a coordinate correlative construction with a topicalization construction in either clause. It argues that the multiple features of the construction are the results of interaction between its form and meaning.
文章引用:张立昌. 并列•关联•比较成分话题化 —The More X, the More Y构式认知研究[J]. 现代语言学, 2017, 5(3): 207-216. https://doi.org/10.12677/ML.2017.53028

参考文献

[1] Cullicover, P.W. and Jackendoff, R. (1999) The View from the Periphery: the English Comparative Correlative. Lin-guistic Inquiry, 4, 543-571.
https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554200
[2] den Dikken, M. (2005) Comparative Correlatives Comparatively. Linguistic Inquiry, 4, 497-532.
https://doi.org/10.1162/002438905774464377
[3] McCawley, J.D. (1988) The Comparative Conditional Con-struction in English, German and Chinese. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of Berkeley, California, 176-187.
https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1791
[4] Fillmore, C., Kay, P. and O’Connor, M.C. (1988) Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case for Let Alone. Language, 64, 501-538.
https://doi.org/10.2307/414531
[5] Abeillie, A. and Borsley, R.D. (2008) Comparative Correlative and Parameters. Language, 118, 1139-1157.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.02.001
[6] Kim, J.-B. (2011) English Comparative Construction: Interactions between Lexicon and Construction. Korean Journal of Linguistics, 2, 317-336.
[7] Jespersen, O. (1961) A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Allen & Unwin and Ejnar Munksgaard, London and Copenhagen.
[8] Eiichi, I. and Radford, A. (2009) Comparative Correlatives in English: A Minimalist-Cartographic Analysis. Essex Research Report in Linguistics, University of Essex, Colchester.
[9] Eiichi, I. (2010) The Comparative Correlative in Standard English: An Analysis of the Internal Structures of the First and Second Clauses. The Economic Journal of Takasaki City University of Economics, 2, 79-92.
[10] Eiichi, I. (2011) Comparative Correlative Constructions Revisited. The Economic Journal of Takasaki University of Economics, 1, 39-55.
[11] Borsley, R.D. (2004) An Approach to English Comparative Correlative. In: Muller, S., Ed, Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, CSLI Publications, Stanford, 70-92.
[12] Borsley, R.D. (2011) Constructions, Functional Heads, and Comparative Correlatives. Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics, 8, 7-20.
[13] Goldberg, A.E. (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
[14] Quirk, R., et al. (1998) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language [M]. 苏州大学《英语语法大全》翻译组, 译. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
[15] Back, S. (1997) On the Semantics of Comparative Conditionals. Linguistics and Philosophy, 3, 229-271.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005361901518
[16] 米春. 英文比较相关句认知语义的重建与解析[J]. 湖南科技大学学报, 2011, 14(3): 94-96.
[17] Dryer, M.S. (2013) Three Types of Noun Phrase Preposing in English. Department of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science, University of Buffalo. http://docsfiles.com/pdf_three_types_of_noun_phrase_preposing_in_english.html
[18] Chafe, W.L. (1975) Giveness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics, and Point of View. In: Li and Thompson, Eds., Subjects and Topics, Academic Press Incorporated, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 125-148.
[19] Li, C.N. and Thompson, S.A. (1975) Subject and Topic: A New Typology of Language. In: Li and Thompson, Eds., Subjects and Topics, Academic Press Incorpo-rated, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 445-456.
[20] Prince, E. (1981) Topicalization, Focus Movement, Yiddish Movement: A Pragmatic Differentiation. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of Berkeley, California, 249-264.
[21] Prince, E. (1984) Topicalization and Left-Dislocation: A Functional Analysis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 433, 213-225.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1984.tb14769.x
[22] Gregory, M.L. and Michaelis, L.A. (2001) Topicalization and Left-Dislocation: A Functional Opposition Revisited. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1665-1706.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00063-1
[23] Iwasaki, E. (2012) On the Semantic Nature of the Subjects in the Copula Omissions in Comparative Correlatives in Japanese. AJELC Journal, 1, 27-38.
[24] Michaelis, L.A. (2004) Type Shifting in Construction Grammar: An Integrated Approach to Aspectual Coercion. Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 1-68.
https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.001