TRA CỨU
Các bộ sưu tập
Skip Navigation Links.
Thư mục - Vốn tư liệu
离合词的句法本质再探——对袁毓林(2018)等质疑的回应

离合词的句法本质再探——对袁毓林(2018)等质疑的回应

 叶狂, 潘海华.
 2018.
 p. 605-615. 中文
同源宾语转喻.Metonymy.Cú pháp.Cognate objects.Complementary deletion.互补删略.Hoán dụ.+ 2 từ khóa
Tác giả CN 叶狂, 潘海华.
Nhan đề 离合词的句法本质再探——对袁毓林(2018)等质疑的回应 / 叶狂, 潘海华.
Thông tin xuất bản 2018.
Mô tả vật lý p. 605-615.
Tóm tắt Yuan(2018) as well as others argues against Pan and Ye’s(2015) "cognate object hypothesis" which advocates that the constructions with separable words in Mandarin Chinese are bona fide cognate object constructions and no split inside disyllabic verbs has ever taken place. Yuan puts forward his own "metonymy hypothesis" for the separable words, claiming that the very mechanism that sanctions disyllabic words to be used in a divorced manner is formal metonymy, where a verb phrase with an incorpora.
Tóm tắt 潘海华、叶狂(2015)提出汉语离合词结构本质上是双音节不及物动词带同源宾语形成的结构,离合词因而没有分开过。该文发表以来,受到学界广泛关注,也引发争议。袁毓林(2018)在对"同源宾语说"质疑的基础上提出了"形式转喻说"。文章首先对相关疑问一一回应,并指出"转喻说"面临三个难题:不能解释近义的双音节及物、不及物动词之间的句法对立;离合词与粘合式动宾结构之间也存在极大差异,二者难以建立转喻关系;离合词结构中的形义错配还需要另外的机制来解释。之后,文章在跨语言句法共性视野下,对比汉语离合结构与英语同源宾语结构的相似性,进一步支持潘和叶(2015)的观点。最后,文章指出,孟琮等(1999)很早就提到离合词是同源宾语结构,但未展开。潘和叶(2015)以及本文只不过是提供了详细论证。
Thuật ngữ chủ đề 同源宾语
Từ khóa tự do 转喻.
Từ khóa tự do Metonymy.
Từ khóa tự do Cú pháp.
Từ khóa tự do Cognate objects.
Từ khóa tự do Complementary deletion.
Từ khóa tự do 互补删略.
Từ khóa tự do Hoán dụ.
Từ khóa tự do Syntactic universal.
Từ khóa tự do 句法共性.
Tác giả(bs) CN 潘海华.
Nguồn trích 当代语言学 = Contemporary Linguistics.- 2018/4 - Volume 20
MARC
Hiển thị đầy đủ trường & trường con
TagGiá trị
00000000nab#a2200000ui#4500
00154022
0022
0048DE22539-D38B-463C-9250-9BA475881D16
005202007101102
008081223s2018 vm| vie
0091 0
035[ ] |a 1456405929
039[ ] |a 20241129160827 |b idtocn |c 20200710110222 |d huongnt |y 20181225162611 |z thuvt
041[0 ] |a chi
044[ ] |a ch
100[0 ] |a 叶狂, 潘海华.
245[1 0] |a 离合词的句法本质再探——对袁毓林(2018)等质疑的回应 / |c 叶狂, 潘海华.
260[ ] |c 2018.
300[1 0] |a p. 605-615.
520[ ] |a Yuan(2018) as well as others argues against Pan and Ye’s(2015) "cognate object hypothesis" which advocates that the constructions with separable words in Mandarin Chinese are bona fide cognate object constructions and no split inside disyllabic verbs has ever taken place. Yuan puts forward his own "metonymy hypothesis" for the separable words, claiming that the very mechanism that sanctions disyllabic words to be used in a divorced manner is formal metonymy, where a verb phrase with an incorpora.
520[ ] |a 潘海华、叶狂(2015)提出汉语离合词结构本质上是双音节不及物动词带同源宾语形成的结构,离合词因而没有分开过。该文发表以来,受到学界广泛关注,也引发争议。袁毓林(2018)在对"同源宾语说"质疑的基础上提出了"形式转喻说"。文章首先对相关疑问一一回应,并指出"转喻说"面临三个难题:不能解释近义的双音节及物、不及物动词之间的句法对立;离合词与粘合式动宾结构之间也存在极大差异,二者难以建立转喻关系;离合词结构中的形义错配还需要另外的机制来解释。之后,文章在跨语言句法共性视野下,对比汉语离合结构与英语同源宾语结构的相似性,进一步支持潘和叶(2015)的观点。最后,文章指出,孟琮等(1999)很早就提到离合词是同源宾语结构,但未展开。潘和叶(2015)以及本文只不过是提供了详细论证。
650[0 0] |a 同源宾语
653[0 ] |a 转喻.
653[0 ] |a Metonymy.
653[0 ] |a Cú pháp.
653[0 ] |a Cognate objects.
653[0 ] |a Complementary deletion.
653[0 ] |a 互补删略.
653[0 ] |a Hoán dụ.
653[0 ] |a Syntactic universal.
653[0 ] |a 句法共性.
700[0 ] |a 潘海华.
773[0 ] |t 当代语言学 = Contemporary Linguistics. |g 2018/4 - Volume 20
890[ ] |a 0 |b 0 |c 0 |d 0