英汉情感强化副词比较研究
A Comparative Study of Emotive Intensifiers in Chinese and English
摘要: 本文从共时和历时两个角度出发,基于BCC、CCL和COCA语料库,分别讨论了英汉情感强化副词的构式压制运作机制和语义变化路径并比较了二者的异同。研究发现英语中带有消极情绪的词更容易成为情感强化副词,而汉语中带有积极情绪的词更容易成为情感强化副词,语境在“情感强化副词 + 形容词”的构式中占主导作用,主观化和人际主观化是影响情感强化副词语义变化的主要原因。
Abstract:
Based on BCC, CCL and COCA, this paper shows the construction coercion mechanism and semantic change of English and Chinese emotive intensifiers from synchronic and diachronic perspectives, and compares their similarities and differences. It is found that English words with negative emotions are more likely to become emotive intensifiers, while Chinese words with positive emotions are more likely to become emotive intensifiers; context plays a dominant role in the construction of “EIA”; subjectification and intersubjectivification are the main factors that affect the semantic changes of emotive intensifiers.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
Jing-Schmidt, Z. (2007) Negative Bias in Language: A Cognitive Affective Model of Emotive Intensifiers. Cognitive Linguistics, 18, 417-443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[2]
|
刘芬, 白解红. 英语“情感强化副词 + 形容词”构式的语义压制[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2019, 51(5): 665-676.
|
|
[3]
|
刘剑辉, 刘芬. 英汉情感强化副词研究现状与分析[J]. 上海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2017, 46(6): 121-128.
|
|
[4]
|
Paul, E. and Wallace, V. (2003) Unmasking the Face: A Guide to Recognizing Emotions from Facial Clues. Malor Books.
|
|
[5]
|
Traugott, E.C. and Dasher, R.B. (2002) Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|
|
[6]
|
沈家煊. 语言的“主观性”和“主观化” [J]. 外语教学与研究, 2001, 33(4): 268-287.
|
|
[7]
|
Langacker, R.W. (1999) Grammar and Conceptualization. Mouton de Gruter, Berlin/New York. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|