试析汉语的旁格成分作宾语现象与施用结构——兼议零形素施用标记的设立标准
|
摘要
随着班图、南岛等语言中的"施用结构"及其相关理论被引入汉语研究,关于汉语的"非核心论元"是否可以归入施用范畴、汉语中是否存在零形素施用标记的问题引起了争鸣。针对相关的分歧,本文选取了汉语的"旁格宾语结构"(如"吃食堂、写毛笔")同典型的施用结构进行对比分析,论证了汉语的旁格宾语结构与施用结构只是表面相似,两者在论元结构、宾语句法属性及篇章功能等方面都存在重要差异,旁格宾语结构需要不同于典型施用结构的理论解释。文章还在此基础上探讨了跨语言比较中零形素施用标记的设立标准问题。
After the applicative construction used in Bantu and Austronesian families and related theories being introduced into China, Chinese linguists have had heated discussions on whether the non-core arguments in Chinese can be subsumed under applicative categories or whether zero applicative markers exist. This paper offers a comparative study on the contrast between the oblique object construction(OOC) in Chinese and the typical applicative construction in Bantu and Austronesian families, arguing that these two constructions only superficially look alike but differ in argument numbers, object properties and discourse functions. The OOC in Chinese needs a theoretical explanation that is different from any of those in the literature for the typical applicative constructions. On the basis of these above discussions, the article explores the criterion of setting zero morphemes as the applicative markers in the comparative cross-linguistic studies.
After the applicative construction used in Bantu and Austronesian families and related theories being introduced into China, Chinese linguists have had heated discussions on whether the non-core arguments in Chinese can be subsumed under applicative categories or whether zero applicative markers exist. This paper offers a comparative study on the contrast between the oblique object construction(OOC) in Chinese and the typical applicative construction in Bantu and Austronesian families, arguing that these two constructions only superficially look alike but differ in argument numbers, object properties and discourse functions. The OOC in Chinese needs a theoretical explanation that is different from any of those in the literature for the typical applicative constructions. On the basis of these above discussions, the article explores the criterion of setting zero morphemes as the applicative markers in the comparative cross-linguistic studies.
引文
Alsina, Alex and Sam Mchombo. 1990. The syntax of applicatives in: Problems for a theta theoretic asymmetry. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4:493-506.
Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press.
Barrie, Michael and Yen-Hui Audrey Li (李艳惠). 2015. Analysis vs. synthesis: Objects. In Yen-Hui Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson, and Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai, eds., Chinese Syntax in a Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, Jie (程杰). 2009. The null preposition hypothesis and the applicative construction: A syntactic study of the post-intransitive-verb non-core arguments. Modern Foreign Languages 1:23-32. [2009, 虚介词假设与增元结构: 论不及物动词后非核心论元的句法属性。《现代外语》第1期, 23-32页。]
Cheng, Jie (程杰). 2011. Zero-morpheme syntax and the uniformity of theta assignment hypothesis: The verification of applicative constructions in Chinese. TCSOL Studies 4:53-63,78. [2011, 零形素句法、 论旨指派统一性假设与汉语增元结构证实。《华文教学与研究》第4期, 53-63, 78页。]
Cheng, Jie and Binli Wen (温宾利). 2008. An applicative-construction analysis of two types of Chinese non-core arguments. Journal of Sichuan International Studies University 2:82-7. [2008, 对汉语两类非核心论元的APPL分析——兼论英汉APPL结构之差异。《四川外语学院学报》第2期: 82-7页。]
Croft, William. 1990. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deng, Haoxi (邓昊熙). 2014. Differences between constructions with post-verbal non-core element and the applicative constructions in Bantu languages. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 6:54-64. [2014, 试析论元增容与施用结构——从汉语动词后非核心成分的允准与施用结构的差异说起。《语言教学与研究》第6期, 54-64页。]
Dixon, Robert M.W. and Alexandra Aikhenvald. 2000. Changing Valency Case Studies in Transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donohue, M. 1996. Variation in applicative structures: Case marking, agreement, and grammatical relations. Ms., Australian National University.
Donohue, M. 2001. Coding choices in argument structure: Austronesian applicatives in texts. Studies in Language 25,2:217-54.
Feng, Shengli (冯胜利). 2005. Light verb movement in modern and classical Chinese. Linguistic Sciences 1:3-16. [2005, 轻动词移位与古今汉语的动宾关系。《语言科学》第1期, 3-16页。]
Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.
Givón, Talmy. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In Talmy Givón, ed., Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pp.1-41.
Givón, Talmy. 1984. Direct object and dative shifting: Semantic and pragmatic case. In F. Planck, ed., Objects: Towards a Theory of Grammatical Relations. London: Academic Press. Pp.151-82.
Guo, Rui (郭锐). 2009. Preposition stranding and deletion in Mandarin and Classic Chinese. In Chinese Linguistics Vol.2. Jinan: Shandong Education Press. Pp.23-36. [2009, 现代汉语和古代汉语中的介词悬空和介词删除。《中国语言学》第2辑。济南: 山东教育出版社。23-36页。]
Haas, William. 1957. Zero in linguistic description. In John R. Firth, ed., Studies in Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Pp.33-53.
Hu, Jianhua (胡建华). 2007. Theta-roles, arguments, and GF: Case-marking effect and language variation. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 3:163-68. [2007, 题元、 论元和语法功能项——格标效应与语言差异。《外语教学与研究》第3期, 163-68页。]
Hu, Jianhua (胡建华). 2010. The distribution and selection of arguments: Prominence and locality in grammar. Studies of the Chinese Language 1:3-20. [2010, 论元的分布与选择——语法中的显著性和局部性。《中国语文》第1期, 3-20页。]
Jiang, Zhaozi (姜兆梓). 2015. Asymmetries in the eat canteen-construction and its relevant sentence patterns. Modern Foreign Languages 1:15-25. [2015, “吃食堂”及其相关句式中的非对称性。《现代外语》第1期, 15-25页。]
Lin, Tzong-Hong (林宗宏). 2001. Light verb syntax and the theory of phrase structure. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Irvine.
Marantz, Alec. 1982. Affixation and the syntax of applied verb constructions. In Proceedings of the First West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
McGinnis, Martha. 2001. Phases and the syntax of applicatives. In Min-Joo Kim and Uri Strauss, eds., Proceedings of NELS 31. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Pp.333-49.
Peterson, David. A. 2007. Applicative Constructions. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.
Polinsky, Maria. 2013. Applicative constructions. In Matthew S. Dryer and Martin Haspelmath, eds., The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig. Available at: http://wals.info/chapter/109 [accessed 8, Oct. 2018]
Pylkk?nen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Ph.D. diss., MIT.
Rude, Noel. 1986. Topicality, transitivity, and the direct object in Nez Perce. International Journal of American Linguistics 52, 124-53.
Shen, Yang (沈阳). 2009. Semantic absorption, incorporation and the derivation of double object construction. Chinese Teaching in the World 2:147-59. [2009, 词义吸收、 词形合并和汉语双宾结构的句法构造。《世界汉语教学》第2期, 147-59页。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2009. On oblique objects in Chinese. Chinese Language Learning 3:70-7. [2009, 谈汉语中旁格成分作宾语现象。《汉语学习》第3期: 70-7。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2010. A study on the license pattern and mechanism of non-core arguments in Mandarin Chinese. Ph.D. diss., Peking University. [2010, 现代汉语非核心论元允准模式及机制研究。北京大学博士学位论文。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2015. Double object constructions and applicative operations in Mandarin. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 1:49-58. [2015, 汉语的双宾结构与施用操作。《语言教学与研究》第1期, 49-58页。]
Sun, Tianqi and Yafei Li (李亚非). 2010. Licensing non-core arguments in Chinese. Studies of the Chinese Language1:21-33. [2010, 汉语非核心论元允准结构初探。《中国语文》第1期, 21-33页。]
Tao, Hongyin (陶红印). 2000. “Eating”and emergent argument structure. Studies in Language and Linguistics 3:21-38. [2000, 从“吃”看动词论元结构的动态特征。《语言研究》第3期, 21-38页。]
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan (蔡维天). 2007. On inner and outer light verbs in Chinese. The Academic Forum on Contemporary Chinese Syntax and Semantics among the Three Districts across the Strait, City University of Hong Kong. [2007, 谈汉语中的内外轻动词。两岸三地现代汉语句法语义小型学术论坛, 香港城市大学。]
Xing, Fuyi (邢福义). 1991. An observation on phenomenon of object-substitution in Chinese. Chinese Teaching in the World 2:76-84. [1991, 汉语里宾语代入现象之观察。《世界汉语教学》第2期, 76-84页。]
Yuan, Yulin (袁毓林). 1998. A Study on Valence of Chinese Verbs. Nanchang: Jiangxi Education Press. [1998, 《汉语动词的配价研究》。南昌: 江西教育出版社。]
Zhang, Min (张敏). 2010. On phenomenon of object-overusing in Chinese from a typological perspective. The Conference in memory of the 90th Birthday of Professor Zhu Dexi and the 50th Anniversary of Professor Lu Jianming's Teaching Career, Peking University. [2010, 从类型学看汉语的“宾语过度”现象。纪念朱德熙教授诞辰90周年、 陆俭明教授从教50周年学术研讨会, 北京大学。]
Zhang, Yunqiu (张云秋). 2004. A Study on Patient Object Sentences in Mandarin. Shanghai: Xuelin Press. [2004, 《现代汉语受事宾语句研究》。上海: 学林出版社。]
(1)applicative construction 目前在汉语学界较为普遍和流行的译名是“施用结构”, 本文为了保持更顺畅的学术对话沿用此译名。但如果从揭示applicative construction的本质来说, “施用”的译法并不是十分理想。胡建华(2010)曾使用“涉用”的译法, 这个译名更能体现提升各类“涉用格/旁格”的结构原貌。
(2)本文施用结构用例采用莱比锡规则, 涉及到的缩略表达如下: ASP=aspect(体), APP=applicative(施用标记), CL=classifier(单位词), FV=final vowel(尾元音), INST=instrument(工具), PASS=passive morpheme(被动语缀), PST / PAST=past tense(过去时), PRES / PR=present tense(现在时), REL=relativizer(关系化标记), SP=subject agreement prefix(主语一致前缀)。
(3)张敏(2010)使用的术语是“宾语过度”。文章的讨论对象与本文大致相同, 也涉及到各种非核心语义成分占据宾语位置的现象。
(4)我们对50位在校本科生进行了测试, 其中只有接近7%的人可以准确理解“吃床板儿”的语义。
(5)姜兆梓(2015)举了一条语料说明有一些施用结构中的固有宾语“可以出现, 也可以不出现”。对我们来说重要的是, 即使这种情况属实, 这个结论与本文也没有冲突。因为我们强调的是施用结构中固有宾语可以与非核心宾语共现, 而旁格宾语结构中两者“不能”在宾语位置共现。这个差异是客观存在的, 不受个别施用结构中固有宾语可以省略的影响。
(6)根据Peterson(2007: 202)对实际语篇中出现的施用结构的统计, “伴随者”施用宾语的出现频率排名第二, 仅次于“受益者/受损者”类型。
(7)此处进行关系化测试时不能单纯依靠“V的是……”这一标准。因为在汉语中“V的是……”这一结构所提取的范围远远大于动宾结构所限定的宾语范围, 比如可以说“(恐怖片)看的就是刺激”“现在的年轻人穿的是感觉”, 但事实上并没有“*看刺激”“*穿感觉”的说法。因此, 汉语“V的是……”结构所提取的并不一定是相关动词的宾语, 用这个结构测试旁格宾语的关系化也是欠妥当的。
Baker, Mark. 1988. Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press.
Barrie, Michael and Yen-Hui Audrey Li (李艳惠). 2015. Analysis vs. synthesis: Objects. In Yen-Hui Audrey Li, Andrew Simpson, and Wei-Tien Dylan Tsai, eds., Chinese Syntax in a Cross-linguistic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, Jie (程杰). 2009. The null preposition hypothesis and the applicative construction: A syntactic study of the post-intransitive-verb non-core arguments. Modern Foreign Languages 1:23-32. [2009, 虚介词假设与增元结构: 论不及物动词后非核心论元的句法属性。《现代外语》第1期, 23-32页。]
Cheng, Jie (程杰). 2011. Zero-morpheme syntax and the uniformity of theta assignment hypothesis: The verification of applicative constructions in Chinese. TCSOL Studies 4:53-63,78. [2011, 零形素句法、 论旨指派统一性假设与汉语增元结构证实。《华文教学与研究》第4期, 53-63, 78页。]
Cheng, Jie and Binli Wen (温宾利). 2008. An applicative-construction analysis of two types of Chinese non-core arguments. Journal of Sichuan International Studies University 2:82-7. [2008, 对汉语两类非核心论元的APPL分析——兼论英汉APPL结构之差异。《四川外语学院学报》第2期: 82-7页。]
Croft, William. 1990. Typology and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Deng, Haoxi (邓昊熙). 2014. Differences between constructions with post-verbal non-core element and the applicative constructions in Bantu languages. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 6:54-64. [2014, 试析论元增容与施用结构——从汉语动词后非核心成分的允准与施用结构的差异说起。《语言教学与研究》第6期, 54-64页。]
Dixon, Robert M.W. and Alexandra Aikhenvald. 2000. Changing Valency Case Studies in Transitivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Donohue, M. 1996. Variation in applicative structures: Case marking, agreement, and grammatical relations. Ms., Australian National University.
Donohue, M. 2001. Coding choices in argument structure: Austronesian applicatives in texts. Studies in Language 25,2:217-54.
Feng, Shengli (冯胜利). 2005. Light verb movement in modern and classical Chinese. Linguistic Sciences 1:3-16. [2005, 轻动词移位与古今汉语的动宾关系。《语言科学》第1期, 3-16页。]
Givón, Talmy. 1979. On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.
Givón, Talmy. 1983. Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. In Talmy Givón, ed., Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Pp.1-41.
Givón, Talmy. 1984. Direct object and dative shifting: Semantic and pragmatic case. In F. Planck, ed., Objects: Towards a Theory of Grammatical Relations. London: Academic Press. Pp.151-82.
Guo, Rui (郭锐). 2009. Preposition stranding and deletion in Mandarin and Classic Chinese. In Chinese Linguistics Vol.2. Jinan: Shandong Education Press. Pp.23-36. [2009, 现代汉语和古代汉语中的介词悬空和介词删除。《中国语言学》第2辑。济南: 山东教育出版社。23-36页。]
Haas, William. 1957. Zero in linguistic description. In John R. Firth, ed., Studies in Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Pp.33-53.
Hu, Jianhua (胡建华). 2007. Theta-roles, arguments, and GF: Case-marking effect and language variation. Foreign Language Teaching and Research 3:163-68. [2007, 题元、 论元和语法功能项——格标效应与语言差异。《外语教学与研究》第3期, 163-68页。]
Hu, Jianhua (胡建华). 2010. The distribution and selection of arguments: Prominence and locality in grammar. Studies of the Chinese Language 1:3-20. [2010, 论元的分布与选择——语法中的显著性和局部性。《中国语文》第1期, 3-20页。]
Jiang, Zhaozi (姜兆梓). 2015. Asymmetries in the eat canteen-construction and its relevant sentence patterns. Modern Foreign Languages 1:15-25. [2015, “吃食堂”及其相关句式中的非对称性。《现代外语》第1期, 15-25页。]
Lin, Tzong-Hong (林宗宏). 2001. Light verb syntax and the theory of phrase structure. Ph.D. diss., University of California, Irvine.
Marantz, Alec. 1982. Affixation and the syntax of applied verb constructions. In Proceedings of the First West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
McGinnis, Martha. 2001. Phases and the syntax of applicatives. In Min-Joo Kim and Uri Strauss, eds., Proceedings of NELS 31. GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Pp.333-49.
Peterson, David. A. 2007. Applicative Constructions. Oxford / New York: Oxford University Press.
Polinsky, Maria. 2013. Applicative constructions. In Matthew S. Dryer and Martin Haspelmath, eds., The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig. Available at: http://wals.info/chapter/109 [accessed 8, Oct. 2018]
Pylkk?nen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Ph.D. diss., MIT.
Rude, Noel. 1986. Topicality, transitivity, and the direct object in Nez Perce. International Journal of American Linguistics 52, 124-53.
Shen, Yang (沈阳). 2009. Semantic absorption, incorporation and the derivation of double object construction. Chinese Teaching in the World 2:147-59. [2009, 词义吸收、 词形合并和汉语双宾结构的句法构造。《世界汉语教学》第2期, 147-59页。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2009. On oblique objects in Chinese. Chinese Language Learning 3:70-7. [2009, 谈汉语中旁格成分作宾语现象。《汉语学习》第3期: 70-7。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2010. A study on the license pattern and mechanism of non-core arguments in Mandarin Chinese. Ph.D. diss., Peking University. [2010, 现代汉语非核心论元允准模式及机制研究。北京大学博士学位论文。]
Sun, Tianqi (孙天琦). 2015. Double object constructions and applicative operations in Mandarin. Language Teaching and Linguistic Studies 1:49-58. [2015, 汉语的双宾结构与施用操作。《语言教学与研究》第1期, 49-58页。]
Sun, Tianqi and Yafei Li (李亚非). 2010. Licensing non-core arguments in Chinese. Studies of the Chinese Language1:21-33. [2010, 汉语非核心论元允准结构初探。《中国语文》第1期, 21-33页。]
Tao, Hongyin (陶红印). 2000. “Eating”and emergent argument structure. Studies in Language and Linguistics 3:21-38. [2000, 从“吃”看动词论元结构的动态特征。《语言研究》第3期, 21-38页。]
Tsai, W.-T. Dylan (蔡维天). 2007. On inner and outer light verbs in Chinese. The Academic Forum on Contemporary Chinese Syntax and Semantics among the Three Districts across the Strait, City University of Hong Kong. [2007, 谈汉语中的内外轻动词。两岸三地现代汉语句法语义小型学术论坛, 香港城市大学。]
Xing, Fuyi (邢福义). 1991. An observation on phenomenon of object-substitution in Chinese. Chinese Teaching in the World 2:76-84. [1991, 汉语里宾语代入现象之观察。《世界汉语教学》第2期, 76-84页。]
Yuan, Yulin (袁毓林). 1998. A Study on Valence of Chinese Verbs. Nanchang: Jiangxi Education Press. [1998, 《汉语动词的配价研究》。南昌: 江西教育出版社。]
Zhang, Min (张敏). 2010. On phenomenon of object-overusing in Chinese from a typological perspective. The Conference in memory of the 90th Birthday of Professor Zhu Dexi and the 50th Anniversary of Professor Lu Jianming's Teaching Career, Peking University. [2010, 从类型学看汉语的“宾语过度”现象。纪念朱德熙教授诞辰90周年、 陆俭明教授从教50周年学术研讨会, 北京大学。]
Zhang, Yunqiu (张云秋). 2004. A Study on Patient Object Sentences in Mandarin. Shanghai: Xuelin Press. [2004, 《现代汉语受事宾语句研究》。上海: 学林出版社。]
(1)applicative construction 目前在汉语学界较为普遍和流行的译名是“施用结构”, 本文为了保持更顺畅的学术对话沿用此译名。但如果从揭示applicative construction的本质来说, “施用”的译法并不是十分理想。胡建华(2010)曾使用“涉用”的译法, 这个译名更能体现提升各类“涉用格/旁格”的结构原貌。
(2)本文施用结构用例采用莱比锡规则, 涉及到的缩略表达如下: ASP=aspect(体), APP=applicative(施用标记), CL=classifier(单位词), FV=final vowel(尾元音), INST=instrument(工具), PASS=passive morpheme(被动语缀), PST / PAST=past tense(过去时), PRES / PR=present tense(现在时), REL=relativizer(关系化标记), SP=subject agreement prefix(主语一致前缀)。
(3)张敏(2010)使用的术语是“宾语过度”。文章的讨论对象与本文大致相同, 也涉及到各种非核心语义成分占据宾语位置的现象。
(4)我们对50位在校本科生进行了测试, 其中只有接近7%的人可以准确理解“吃床板儿”的语义。
(5)姜兆梓(2015)举了一条语料说明有一些施用结构中的固有宾语“可以出现, 也可以不出现”。对我们来说重要的是, 即使这种情况属实, 这个结论与本文也没有冲突。因为我们强调的是施用结构中固有宾语可以与非核心宾语共现, 而旁格宾语结构中两者“不能”在宾语位置共现。这个差异是客观存在的, 不受个别施用结构中固有宾语可以省略的影响。
(6)根据Peterson(2007: 202)对实际语篇中出现的施用结构的统计, “伴随者”施用宾语的出现频率排名第二, 仅次于“受益者/受损者”类型。
(7)此处进行关系化测试时不能单纯依靠“V的是……”这一标准。因为在汉语中“V的是……”这一结构所提取的范围远远大于动宾结构所限定的宾语范围, 比如可以说“(恐怖片)看的就是刺激”“现在的年轻人穿的是感觉”, 但事实上并没有“*看刺激”“*穿感觉”的说法。因此, 汉语“V的是……”结构所提取的并不一定是相关动词的宾语, 用这个结构测试旁格宾语的关系化也是欠妥当的。