重庆话口语中话题的结构与功能
摘要
话题现象是语言学研究的热点，功能派、形式派都从各自的立场对话题概念进行界定。从功能上说，话题具有已知性，是话语的出发点，是句子内容相关之所在。从结构上说，话题可以被定义为句首的成分，语序也是话题化的手段之一。
对汉语话题而言，赵元任（1968）认为汉语的主语和话题是等同的，而Li和Thompson（1976）在“主语-话题”的类型学里把汉语归为话题优先型语言，英语归为主语优先型语言，使人们将话题和主语区别对待。徐烈炯、刘丹青赞同他们关于汉语话题优先型的观点，并用上海方言为研究对象，以乔姆斯基的一般化转换说为理论框架，把汉语话题定义为一个语法化的句法成分，并把话题从结构位置上分为主话题、次话题和次次话题，开创了用当代语言类型学的成果来研究汉语方言的句法类型的先河，也做出了把汉语话题作为一种句法成分而建立一种新的汉语语法体系的大胆尝试。但徐烈炯、刘丹青在理论上设立主话题、次话题、次次话题的做法也导致了句法歧义的产生，袁毓林（2003）就指出这种句法歧义的产生究竟是句子本身的结构造成还是理论上的设置所致，并且怀疑主话题、次话题和次次话题划分的必要性。徐、刘二位学者与袁毓林的分歧在于从理论上把话题作为句法结构上的概念处理还是作为功能层面的概念处理。石毓智（2001）也认为汉语中的主语和话题不能划等号，句法上的主语可以成为话题的一种表现形式，话题可以分为无标记话题和标记性话题两种形式。
针对汉语话题界定的这种纠葛，本文在分析徐烈炯、刘丹青对汉语话题句法定义的基础上，从功能层面对话题进行界定，并根据不同成分具备话题功能时的不同结构特点把话题分为标记性话题和无标记话题。本文以重庆话口语为研究对象，通过随机录音建立了约50669字的重庆话口语语料库，对重庆话口语中可以用作话题标记的后附性虚词“耶”、“唻”、“唛”、“嗳”进行分析，以说话人性别和年龄为变量，探究性别和年龄是否导致这些后附性虚词在使用功能上的差异，是否导致它们用作话题标记时的使用差异以及是否导致它们用作语气词时的使用差异。本文还分析了重庆话口语中话题的主要功能和句子中多个话题并存时的相互关系，对于汉语话题的语法化，本文也通过分析汉语里，尤其是重庆话口语里不同成分具备话题功能的不同结构，认为汉语话题语法化程度高于英语话题语法化程度并非由于汉语话题已经语法化为一个句法成分，而是因为汉语话题语法化的形式更加丰富，无论是具备话题功能成分的多样性和广泛性，还是话题标记手段的多样性，都说明汉语话题较高的语法化程度。对于汉语里特有的“把”字句结构，本文也分析了它的话题性，认为从功能层面讲，“把”字结构的话题功能是显而易见的。最后，本文还分析了话题的指称性，无论是名词性结构作话题，还是动词性结构或小句作话题，都有一定的指称特点。
本文结合功能和句法的理论知识，以重庆话口语为研究对象，对汉语话题从功能上进行界定，并探究汉语及其方言里实现话题功能的各种句法手段，同时以社会语言学和统计学的方法分析重庆话口语里特有话题标记词的真实使用情况，希望对汉语话题和重庆方言的研究提供新的借鉴和参考。
Topic is one of the most important issues in linguistic study which is discussedfrom both syntactic and functional perspectives. From the functional perspective,topic is concerned with old information, the beginning of a sentence, and theaboutness of a sentence. From the syntactic perspective, topic can be defined as theinitial part of a sentence, and the sentence order is an important way for topicalization.
In regard to the topic in Chinese, Chao Yen-Ren treats the subject in Chinese asthe topic, but Li and Thompson treat Chinese as topic-prominent language whileEnglish as subject-prominent language. Xu Lie-jiong and Liu Dan-qing also seeChinese as topic-prominent language, and base their syntactic definition of topic onthe analysis about Shanghai dialect. According to their definition, topic has become agrammaticalized syntactic element in Chinese sentence structure, which can bedefined as main topic, subtopic, and sub-subtopic due to their different structuralpositions. Xu and Liu’s definition on topic has made great contribution to thesystematic study on Chinese topic structure, especially on the topic structure ofChinese dialect. However, their definition of main topic, subtopic, and sub-subtopicalso leads to syntactically ambiguous sentence, and this makes Yuan Yu-lin wonderwhether this kind of ambiguity comes from the sentence structure itself or thedefinition. Therefore Yuan Yu-lin wonders about the necessity of such a syntacticdefinition and suggests defining topic as a functional element. Shi Yu-zhi also treatssubject as a syntactic element while topic as a functional element and thinks thatsubject is one of those syntactic elements which can realize topic function. Besides,Shi treats topic as unmarked and marked according to different syntactic formsrequired for the realization of topical function.
To solve the problems caused by different definitions on topic, this paper firstgives an analysis to Xu Lie-jiong and Liu Danqing’s definition of topic, and thengives a functional definition to topic and treats topic as unmarked and markedaccording to different syntactic elements functioning as topic. Based on this new definition of topic, this paper gives a detailed analysis to the syntactic elements whichfunction as topic in oral Chongqing dialect. The study on topic in this paper is basedon a corpus of oral Chongqing dialect, which has about50669Chinese characters.Since some unique words in oral Chongqing dialect can be used both as topic markerand as mood word, this paper gives a statistical analysis to their actual use in daily life,to see whether the speakers’ sex and age cause differences in the use of these words.In the following chapter, this paper discusses the main functions of topic inChongqing dialect and the relationship between several topics in one sentence. Alsoare discussed in this paper the grammaticalization of topic in Chinese, the topicstructure of the “ba” sentence in Chinese, and the reference of topic. By discussing thefunctional definition of topic in Chinese and analyzing how the syntactic elements inoral Chongqing dialect function as topic, this paper aims to provide a systematicinsight for the study of both topic in Chinese and oral Chongqing dialect.
对汉语话题而言，赵元任（1968）认为汉语的主语和话题是等同的，而Li和Thompson（1976）在“主语-话题”的类型学里把汉语归为话题优先型语言，英语归为主语优先型语言，使人们将话题和主语区别对待。徐烈炯、刘丹青赞同他们关于汉语话题优先型的观点，并用上海方言为研究对象，以乔姆斯基的一般化转换说为理论框架，把汉语话题定义为一个语法化的句法成分，并把话题从结构位置上分为主话题、次话题和次次话题，开创了用当代语言类型学的成果来研究汉语方言的句法类型的先河，也做出了把汉语话题作为一种句法成分而建立一种新的汉语语法体系的大胆尝试。但徐烈炯、刘丹青在理论上设立主话题、次话题、次次话题的做法也导致了句法歧义的产生，袁毓林（2003）就指出这种句法歧义的产生究竟是句子本身的结构造成还是理论上的设置所致，并且怀疑主话题、次话题和次次话题划分的必要性。徐、刘二位学者与袁毓林的分歧在于从理论上把话题作为句法结构上的概念处理还是作为功能层面的概念处理。石毓智（2001）也认为汉语中的主语和话题不能划等号，句法上的主语可以成为话题的一种表现形式，话题可以分为无标记话题和标记性话题两种形式。
针对汉语话题界定的这种纠葛，本文在分析徐烈炯、刘丹青对汉语话题句法定义的基础上，从功能层面对话题进行界定，并根据不同成分具备话题功能时的不同结构特点把话题分为标记性话题和无标记话题。本文以重庆话口语为研究对象，通过随机录音建立了约50669字的重庆话口语语料库，对重庆话口语中可以用作话题标记的后附性虚词“耶”、“唻”、“唛”、“嗳”进行分析，以说话人性别和年龄为变量，探究性别和年龄是否导致这些后附性虚词在使用功能上的差异，是否导致它们用作话题标记时的使用差异以及是否导致它们用作语气词时的使用差异。本文还分析了重庆话口语中话题的主要功能和句子中多个话题并存时的相互关系，对于汉语话题的语法化，本文也通过分析汉语里，尤其是重庆话口语里不同成分具备话题功能的不同结构，认为汉语话题语法化程度高于英语话题语法化程度并非由于汉语话题已经语法化为一个句法成分，而是因为汉语话题语法化的形式更加丰富，无论是具备话题功能成分的多样性和广泛性，还是话题标记手段的多样性，都说明汉语话题较高的语法化程度。对于汉语里特有的“把”字句结构，本文也分析了它的话题性，认为从功能层面讲，“把”字结构的话题功能是显而易见的。最后，本文还分析了话题的指称性，无论是名词性结构作话题，还是动词性结构或小句作话题，都有一定的指称特点。
本文结合功能和句法的理论知识，以重庆话口语为研究对象，对汉语话题从功能上进行界定，并探究汉语及其方言里实现话题功能的各种句法手段，同时以社会语言学和统计学的方法分析重庆话口语里特有话题标记词的真实使用情况，希望对汉语话题和重庆方言的研究提供新的借鉴和参考。
Topic is one of the most important issues in linguistic study which is discussedfrom both syntactic and functional perspectives. From the functional perspective,topic is concerned with old information, the beginning of a sentence, and theaboutness of a sentence. From the syntactic perspective, topic can be defined as theinitial part of a sentence, and the sentence order is an important way for topicalization.
In regard to the topic in Chinese, Chao Yen-Ren treats the subject in Chinese asthe topic, but Li and Thompson treat Chinese as topic-prominent language whileEnglish as subject-prominent language. Xu Lie-jiong and Liu Dan-qing also seeChinese as topic-prominent language, and base their syntactic definition of topic onthe analysis about Shanghai dialect. According to their definition, topic has become agrammaticalized syntactic element in Chinese sentence structure, which can bedefined as main topic, subtopic, and sub-subtopic due to their different structuralpositions. Xu and Liu’s definition on topic has made great contribution to thesystematic study on Chinese topic structure, especially on the topic structure ofChinese dialect. However, their definition of main topic, subtopic, and sub-subtopicalso leads to syntactically ambiguous sentence, and this makes Yuan Yu-lin wonderwhether this kind of ambiguity comes from the sentence structure itself or thedefinition. Therefore Yuan Yu-lin wonders about the necessity of such a syntacticdefinition and suggests defining topic as a functional element. Shi Yu-zhi also treatssubject as a syntactic element while topic as a functional element and thinks thatsubject is one of those syntactic elements which can realize topic function. Besides,Shi treats topic as unmarked and marked according to different syntactic formsrequired for the realization of topical function.
To solve the problems caused by different definitions on topic, this paper firstgives an analysis to Xu Lie-jiong and Liu Danqing’s definition of topic, and thengives a functional definition to topic and treats topic as unmarked and markedaccording to different syntactic elements functioning as topic. Based on this new definition of topic, this paper gives a detailed analysis to the syntactic elements whichfunction as topic in oral Chongqing dialect. The study on topic in this paper is basedon a corpus of oral Chongqing dialect, which has about50669Chinese characters.Since some unique words in oral Chongqing dialect can be used both as topic markerand as mood word, this paper gives a statistical analysis to their actual use in daily life,to see whether the speakers’ sex and age cause differences in the use of these words.In the following chapter, this paper discusses the main functions of topic inChongqing dialect and the relationship between several topics in one sentence. Alsoare discussed in this paper the grammaticalization of topic in Chinese, the topicstructure of the “ba” sentence in Chinese, and the reference of topic. By discussing thefunctional definition of topic in Chinese and analyzing how the syntactic elements inoral Chongqing dialect function as topic, this paper aims to provide a systematicinsight for the study of both topic in Chinese and oral Chongqing dialect.
引文
Asher, N. Discourse Topic. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):163–201.
--Troubles with Topics: Comments on Kehler, Oberlander, Stede and Zeevat.Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):255–262.
Beaver, D. Accomodating Topics. In R. Van der Sandt and P. Bosch (eds.) TheProceedings of the IBM/Journal of Semantics Conference on Focus, IBMHeidelberg,1994, volume3,439-448,.
--Presupposition and Assertion in Dynamic Semantics. University of Edinburgh,1995.
Beaver, D.&B. Clark. Always and Only: Why not all Focus-sensitive Operators AreAlike. Natural Language Semantics2003,(11):323–362.
Büring, D. Focus Suppositions. Theoretical Linguistics,2004,(30):65–76.
Bussmann, H. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Casielles-Suarez, E. The Syntax-Information Structure Interface. New York&London: Routledge,2004.
Chafe, W. L. Language in Consciousness. Language,1974,50.1,111–133.
--Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Point of View, In C.Li(ed.),1976:25-55.
--Cognitive Constraints on Information Low, In R.Tomlin (ed.) Coherence andGrounding in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,1987:21–52.
Choi, H.-W. Optimazing Structure in Context: Scrambling and Information Structure.Stanford, Calif: CSLI Publications,1999.
--Binding and Discourse Prominence: Reconstruction in Focus Scrambling. In G.Legendre, J. Grimshaw and S. Vikner (eds.) Optimality Theoretic Syntax.Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,2001:143–169.
Chomsky, N. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. In the Minimalist Program.Cambridge MASS: MIT Press,1996.
Cohen, A.&N. Erteschik-shir. Topic, Focus, and the Interpretation of Bare Plurals.Natural Language Semantics2002,(10):125–165.
Dahl, O. Topic-Comment Structure Revisited. In O. Dahl(ed.), Topic and Comment,Contextual Boundness and Focus. Hamburg: Helmut Buske,1974:1-24.
Ernst, T.&C.-C. Wang. Object Preposing in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East AsianLinguistics.1995,(4):235-260.
Erteschik-Shir, N. The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: CUP,1997.
Firbas, J. On Defining the Theme in Functional Sentence Perspective. TravauxLinquistiques de Prague1964,(2):267-280.
--Non-thematic Subjects in Contemporary English. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague1966,(2):239–256.
--On the Concept of Communicative Dynamism in the Theory of FunctionalSentence Perspective. Brno Studies in English1971,(7):12–47.
Frege, G. On Sense and Nominatum,1892, translated by H. Feigl, in A.P.Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press,2001.
Fung S. M. Topic and Focus in Cantonese: An OT-LFG Account. Hong Kong: theUniversity of Hong Kong,2007.
Gawron, J. M. Accommodation and Propositional Focus. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):87–97.
Givon, T. Definiteness and Referenciality. In J. H. Greenberg(ed.)1978.
Glatz, D.&R. Klabunde. Focus as Perspectivation. Linguistics2003,41–5:947–977.
Greenberg, J. H. Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Orderof Meaningful Elements. In J. H. Greenberg(ed.) Universals of Language.Cambridge MASS: MIT Press,1963.
Gundel, J. The Role of Topic and Comment in Linguistic Theory. New York: Garland,1988.
--On Different Kinds of Focus. In P. Bosch and R. Van der Sandt (eds.) Focus andNatural Language Processing, Heidelberg: Institute for Logic and Linguistics,1994:457–466.
Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English. Journal of linguistics,1967,(3),199-244.
Han C.-H.&M. Romero. Disjunction, Focus, and Scope. Linguistic Inquiry,2004,(2):179-217.
Heim, I. The Semantics of Dfinite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. University ofMassachusetts at Amherst,1982[Published in1989by Garland, New York]
Hockett, C. F. A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan,1958.
Hoeksema, J.&F. Zwarts Some Remarks on Focus Adverbs, Journal of Semantics,1991,(8),51–70.
Hole, D. P. Focus and Background Marking in Mandarin Chinese: System and theorybehind cái, jiù, dōu and y. London: RoutledgeCurzon,2004.
Hsu Y.-Y. The Sentence-Internal Topic and Focus in Chinese. In M. K. M. Chan andH. Kang(eds.) Proceedings of the20th North American Conference on ChineseLinguistics. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University.2008,(2):635-652.
Huang, C.-T. J. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. CambridgeMASS: MIT,1982.
Hulstijn, J. Structured Information States. Raising and resolving issues, in A. Benzand G. Jager (eds.), Proceedings of MunDial97, University of Munich,1997.
Ivón, T. Topic Continuity in Discourse: an Introduction. In T. Givón (ed.) TopicContinuity in Discourse: a Quantitative Cross-language Study.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins,1983.
Jacobs, J. Focus, Presuppositions, and Discourse Restrictions. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):99–110.
--The Dimensions of Topic–Comment. Linguistics2001,39–4:641–681.
Jakendoff, R. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press,1972.
Kehler, A. Discourse Topics, Sentence Topics, and Coherence. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):227–240.
Kiss, K. E. Identificational Focus versus Information Focus, Language,1998,74(2):245–273.
Kratzer, A. Interpreting focus: Presupposed or Expressive Meanings? A Comment onGeurts and Van Der Sandt. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):123–136.
Krifka, M. A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions, in J. Jacobs(ed.), Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft4,1992.
--Focus and Presupposition in Dynamic Interpretation. Journal of Semantics,1993,(10):269-300.
--Non-novel Indefinites in Adverbial Quantification. In C. Smith (ed). WorkshopProceedings: Nonnarrative Discourse, Department of Linguistics, University ofTexas at Austin. Texas Linguistics Forum,1999.
Kuno, S. Functional Sentence Perspective: A Case Study from Japanese and English.Linguistic Inquiry,1972,3.3,269–320.
--Subject, Theme and the Speaker’s Empathy A Reexamination of RelativizationPhenomena. In Ch. Li (ed.),1976:417–444.
Lambrecht. K. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP,1994.
Li, C. N.&S. A. Thompson, Subject and Topic: a New Typology of Language. In C.N. Li (ed.) Subject and Topic,457-489. New York: Academic Press,1976.
--An Explanation of Word Order Change from SVO to SOV. Foundations ofLanguage1973,(12):201-214，
--Historical Change of Word Order: a Case Study of Chinese and Its Implications. In J.M. Anderson&Ch. Jones (eds.) Historical Linguistics,1973.
Mathesius, V. A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General LinguisticBasis. Transl. by L. Duskova, ed. by J. Vachek. Prague: Academia,1975.(originally published in Czech under the title Obsahovy rozbor soucasneanglictiny na zaklade obecne lingvistickem, Praha,1961)
Nikolaeva, I. Secondary Topic as a Relation in Information Structure. Linguistics2001,39–1:1–49.
Oberlander, J. On the Reduction of Discourse Topic. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):213–225.
Peregrin, J. Topic and Focus in a Formal Framework. In B. Partee and P. Sgall (eds.)Discourse and Meaning: Papers in Honor of Eva Haji ová, Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins,1996.
Prince, E. F. Topicalization, Focus-Movement and Yiddish-Movement: a PragmaticDifferentiation. Berkeley Linguistics Society,1981,(7),249–264.
--Toward a Taxonomy of Given/New Information. In P. Cole(ed.) RadicalPragmatics, New York: Academic Press,1981:223–255.
--Topicalization and Left-dislocation: a Functional Analysis. In S. J. White and V.Teller (eds.) Discourse in Reading and Linguistics Annals of the New YorkAcademy of Sciences,1984,433,213–25.
Reinhart, T. Pragmatics and Linguistics: an Analysis of Sentence Topics. Philosophica,1981,(27):53-94.
Rooth, M. Association with Focus. University of Massachusetts, Amherst,1985.
--A Theory of Focus Interpretation. Natural Language Semantics,1992,(1),75–116.
Russell, B. On Denoting,1905, in A.P. Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language,Oxford: Oxford University Press,2001.
--Descriptions,1919, in A.P. Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language, Oxford:Oxford University Press,2001.
Sgall, P., E. Haji ová&J. Panenová. The Meaning of the Sentence in its Semantic andPragmatic Aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel,1986.
Stede, M. Does Discourse Processing Need Discourse Topics. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):241–253.
Stoyanova, M. Unique Focus: Languages without Multiple Wh-questions.Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2008.
Sun, C.-F.&T. Givon. On the So-called SOV Word Order in Mandarin Chinese: aQuantified Text Study and Its Implications. Language1985,(61):329-351.
Tai, H.-Y. J. Chinese as a SOV language. In C. Corum et al.(eds.) Papers from theNineth Reginal Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: ChicagoUniversity Press,1973.
Tsao, F.-F. A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: the First Step towards DiscourseAnalysis. Taipei: Student Book Co,1979.
Vallduvi, E. Functional Load, Prosody and Syntax: Left-detachment in Catalan andSpanish. CLS,1988,(24),391–404.
--The Information Component. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,1990.
Ward, G. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Preposing. New York: Garland,1988.
Ward, G. and E. F. Prince, On the Topicalization of Indefinite NPs. Journal ofPragmatics1991,(8):167–178.
Watorek, M.&C. Perdue. Additive Particles and Focus: Observations from Learnerand Native-speaker Production. Linguistics1999,37–2:297–323.
Weil, H. De l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparees aux languesmodernes. Paris: Joubert,1879(1844). Translated as The Order of Words in theAncient Languages compared with that of the Modern Languages. Boston:Ginn&Co.1887by Charles W. Super. Reedited: Amsterdam/Philadelphia: JohnBenjamins1978.
Xu, L.-J. Free empty category. Linguistic Inquiry1986,(17):75-93.
Xu, L.-J.&D. T. Langendoen. Topic Structures in Chinese. Language,1985,(61):1-27.
Xu, Y.-L. Resolving Third-Person Anaphora in Chinese Texts: Towards aFunctional-Pragmatic Model. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Polytechnic University,1995.
Zeevat, H. Asher on Discourse Topic. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):203-211.
曹逢甫,《汉语的句子与子句结构》.北京:北京语言大学出版社,1990.
-《-主题在汉语中的功能研究--迈向语段分析的第一步》.谢天蔚译,北京:语文出版社,1995.
陈国华、王建国.汉语的无标记非主语话题.《世界汉语教学》,2010,(3):310-324.
陈虎.语言信息结构及其多视角研究述评.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2003,(5):1-7.
陈嘉映.《语言哲学》.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
陈姝金.北京话疑问语气词的分布、功能及成因.《中国语文》,1995,(1):17-22.
程丽霞,左偏置结构频率统计与话题结构的显现.《外语教学与研究》,2006,(2):101-107.
--英汉左偏置结构句法、语义对比分析.《外语学刊》,2004,(5):63-67.
崔希亮.把字句的若干句法语义问题.《世界汉语教学》,1995,(3):12-21.
范开泰.语用说略.《中国语文》,1985,(6):11-16.
范晓.三个平面的语法观.北京:北京语言学院出版社,1996.
方梅.北京话句中语气词的功能研究.《中国语文》,1994,(2):129-138.
--汉语对比焦点的句法表现手段.《中国语文》,1995,(4):279-288.
蒋平.是无动把字句还是一种行事句.《中国语文》,2003,(5):419-421.
雷莉.汉语话题标记研究.《西南民族学院学报》,2001,(12):224-227.
--汉语话题的辖域与层级,《中央民族大学学报》,2002,(2):15-20.
李宝伦、潘海华、徐烈炯.对焦点敏感的结构及焦点的语义解释（上）.《当代语言学》,2003,(1):1-11.
--对焦点敏感的结构及焦点的语义解释（下）.《当代语言学》,2003,(2):108-119.
李秉震.汉语话题标记的语义、语用功能研究.南开大学,2010,5.
李大勤.“关系化”对“话题化”的影响—汉语话题结构个案分析.《当代语言学》,2001,(2):127-131.
李临定.主语的语法地位.《中国语文》,1985,(1):15-22.
李英哲、郑良伟、贺上贤、侯炎尧、Larry Foster、Moira Yip.《实用汉语参考语法》.熊文华译,北京:北京语言学院出版社,1990.
刘安国.汉语中的多重主语结构及其句法分析.《现代外语》,1999,(2):21-28.
刘林军、高远.北京话口语中话题化结构和左失位结构分析--兼与英语作类型学对比.《外语教学与研究》,2010,(1):44-51.
刘培玉.把字句的句法、语义和语用分析.《华中师范大学学报》,2002,(5):134-139.
陆俭明.《现代汉语句法论》.北京:商务印书馆，1993.
吕叔湘.《中国文法要略》.北京:商务印书馆，1982.
--《汉语语法分析问题》,收入《汉语语法论文集》.北京：商务印书馆,1984:481-571.
--汉语句法的灵活性.中国语文,1986,(1):34-41.
孟艳丽.也论“把”字句的主题和焦点.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2000,(3):44-46.
聂仁发.不定指话题及其语用策略.《汉语学报》,2005,(2):88-93.
潘建华.每个句子都有焦点吗.《山西师大学报》,2000,(3):123-126.
彭锦维,2001,重庆话语气词的特点,《西南民族学院学报》(7):55-57.
屈承熹.从汉语的焦点与话题看英语中的Y-Movement及其他倒装句.《外语学刊》,1999,(4):1-13.
沈家煊.不对称和标记论.南昌:江西教育出版社,1999.
史有为.主语后停顿与话题《.中国语言学报》,1995,(5):97-123;又载史有为《,汉语如是观》,1997:128–163,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社.
--话题、协同化及话题性.《语言科学》,2005,(3):3-22.
石定栩.主题句研究.载徐烈炯《共性与个性--汉语语言学中的争议》,1–36,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社,1999.
石毓智.汉语的主语与话题之辩，《语言研究》，2001,(2):82-91.
--《语法的形式和理据》.南昌:江西教育出版社,2001.
石毓智、李讷.《汉语语法化的历程———形态句法发展的动因和机制》,北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
王还.《“把”字句和“被”字句》.上海:上海教育出版社,1984.
王力.《中国现代语法》.北京:商务印书馆，1985.
王文晖.近代汉语中的一种特殊把字句.《中国语文》,2001,(4):364-367.
王一敏.把字句的语用结构分析.《上海师范大学学报》,1993,(1):122-124.
文旭.左移位句式的认知解释.《外国语》,2005,(2):45-52.
--话题与话题构式的认知阐释.《重庆大学学报》,2007,(1)：123-130.
吴静、石毓智.英汉主宾语性质的差别及其对话题化的影响.《四川外语学院学报》,2005,(5):74-79.
吴中伟.现代汉语句子的主题研究.北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
徐杰.主语成分、话题特征及相应语言类型.《语言科学》,2003,(1):3-22.
徐烈炯、刘丹青.《话题的结构与功能》.上海:上海教育出版社,2007.
徐通锵.《语言论》,长春:东北师范大学出版社,1997.
--《基础语言学教程》,北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
薛凤生.试论把字句的语义特性.《语言教学与研究》,1987,(1):4-17.
袁毓林.话题化及相关的语法过程.《中国语文》,1996,(4):241-254.
--‘话题的结构与功能’评述.《当代语言学》,2003,(1):54-63.
--句子的焦点结构及其对语义解释的影响.《当代语言学》,2003,(4):323-338.
张斌、范开泰、张亚军.《现代汉语语法分析》,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2000.
张伯江、方梅.汉语口语里的主谓结构.《北京大学学报》,1994,(2):66-75.
--《汉语功能语法研究》.南昌:江西教育出版社,1996.
张大群.主位研究述评.《现代外语》,2009,(3):257-265.
张克定.预设·调核·焦点.《外语学刊》,1999,(4):22-26.
--前置主位的信息状态和语篇功能.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2004,(5):6-9.
张连文.句子主题的所指依存和信息结构层.《四川外语学院学报》,2006,(4):66-71.
张全生.现代汉语焦点结构研究.南开大学,2009.
张孝荣.汉语话题结构中的移位研究.《安徽理工大学学报》(社会科学版),2009,(2):69-72.
赵元任.《汉语口语语法》.1968.吕叔湘译,北京:商务印书馆,1979.
钟华.现代汉语焦点表现手段研究.安徽大学,2007.
周慧先.试析信息焦点及其句法表现手段.《西南民族大学学报》,2005,(6):340-343.
周士宏.信息结构中的对比焦点和对比话题—兼论话题焦点的性质.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2009,(4):12-16.
朱德熙.《语法讲义》.北京：商务印书馆,1982.
--《语法问答》.北京：商务印书馆,1985.
--Troubles with Topics: Comments on Kehler, Oberlander, Stede and Zeevat.Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):255–262.
Beaver, D. Accomodating Topics. In R. Van der Sandt and P. Bosch (eds.) TheProceedings of the IBM/Journal of Semantics Conference on Focus, IBMHeidelberg,1994, volume3,439-448,.
--Presupposition and Assertion in Dynamic Semantics. University of Edinburgh,1995.
Beaver, D.&B. Clark. Always and Only: Why not all Focus-sensitive Operators AreAlike. Natural Language Semantics2003,(11):323–362.
Büring, D. Focus Suppositions. Theoretical Linguistics,2004,(30):65–76.
Bussmann, H. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Beijing: ForeignLanguage Teaching and Research Press,2000.
Casielles-Suarez, E. The Syntax-Information Structure Interface. New York&London: Routledge,2004.
Chafe, W. L. Language in Consciousness. Language,1974,50.1,111–133.
--Givenness, Contrastiveness, Definiteness, Subjects, Topics and Point of View, In C.Li(ed.),1976:25-55.
--Cognitive Constraints on Information Low, In R.Tomlin (ed.) Coherence andGrounding in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins,1987:21–52.
Choi, H.-W. Optimazing Structure in Context: Scrambling and Information Structure.Stanford, Calif: CSLI Publications,1999.
--Binding and Discourse Prominence: Reconstruction in Focus Scrambling. In G.Legendre, J. Grimshaw and S. Vikner (eds.) Optimality Theoretic Syntax.Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press,2001:143–169.
Chomsky, N. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. In the Minimalist Program.Cambridge MASS: MIT Press,1996.
Cohen, A.&N. Erteschik-shir. Topic, Focus, and the Interpretation of Bare Plurals.Natural Language Semantics2002,(10):125–165.
Dahl, O. Topic-Comment Structure Revisited. In O. Dahl(ed.), Topic and Comment,Contextual Boundness and Focus. Hamburg: Helmut Buske,1974:1-24.
Ernst, T.&C.-C. Wang. Object Preposing in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East AsianLinguistics.1995,(4):235-260.
Erteschik-Shir, N. The Dynamics of Focus Structure. Cambridge: CUP,1997.
Firbas, J. On Defining the Theme in Functional Sentence Perspective. TravauxLinquistiques de Prague1964,(2):267-280.
--Non-thematic Subjects in Contemporary English. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague1966,(2):239–256.
--On the Concept of Communicative Dynamism in the Theory of FunctionalSentence Perspective. Brno Studies in English1971,(7):12–47.
Frege, G. On Sense and Nominatum,1892, translated by H. Feigl, in A.P.Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press,2001.
Fung S. M. Topic and Focus in Cantonese: An OT-LFG Account. Hong Kong: theUniversity of Hong Kong,2007.
Gawron, J. M. Accommodation and Propositional Focus. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):87–97.
Givon, T. Definiteness and Referenciality. In J. H. Greenberg(ed.)1978.
Glatz, D.&R. Klabunde. Focus as Perspectivation. Linguistics2003,41–5:947–977.
Greenberg, J. H. Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Orderof Meaningful Elements. In J. H. Greenberg(ed.) Universals of Language.Cambridge MASS: MIT Press,1963.
Gundel, J. The Role of Topic and Comment in Linguistic Theory. New York: Garland,1988.
--On Different Kinds of Focus. In P. Bosch and R. Van der Sandt (eds.) Focus andNatural Language Processing, Heidelberg: Institute for Logic and Linguistics,1994:457–466.
Halliday, M. A. K. Notes on Transitivity and Theme in English. Journal of linguistics,1967,(3),199-244.
Han C.-H.&M. Romero. Disjunction, Focus, and Scope. Linguistic Inquiry,2004,(2):179-217.
Heim, I. The Semantics of Dfinite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. University ofMassachusetts at Amherst,1982[Published in1989by Garland, New York]
Hockett, C. F. A Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan,1958.
Hoeksema, J.&F. Zwarts Some Remarks on Focus Adverbs, Journal of Semantics,1991,(8),51–70.
Hole, D. P. Focus and Background Marking in Mandarin Chinese: System and theorybehind cái, jiù, dōu and y. London: RoutledgeCurzon,2004.
Hsu Y.-Y. The Sentence-Internal Topic and Focus in Chinese. In M. K. M. Chan andH. Kang(eds.) Proceedings of the20th North American Conference on ChineseLinguistics. Columbus, Ohio: The Ohio State University.2008,(2):635-652.
Huang, C.-T. J. Logical relations in Chinese and the theory of grammar. CambridgeMASS: MIT,1982.
Hulstijn, J. Structured Information States. Raising and resolving issues, in A. Benzand G. Jager (eds.), Proceedings of MunDial97, University of Munich,1997.
Ivón, T. Topic Continuity in Discourse: an Introduction. In T. Givón (ed.) TopicContinuity in Discourse: a Quantitative Cross-language Study.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins,1983.
Jacobs, J. Focus, Presuppositions, and Discourse Restrictions. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):99–110.
--The Dimensions of Topic–Comment. Linguistics2001,39–4:641–681.
Jakendoff, R. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press,1972.
Kehler, A. Discourse Topics, Sentence Topics, and Coherence. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):227–240.
Kiss, K. E. Identificational Focus versus Information Focus, Language,1998,74(2):245–273.
Kratzer, A. Interpreting focus: Presupposed or Expressive Meanings? A Comment onGeurts and Van Der Sandt. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):123–136.
Krifka, M. A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions, in J. Jacobs(ed.), Informationsstruktur und Grammatik, Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft4,1992.
--Focus and Presupposition in Dynamic Interpretation. Journal of Semantics,1993,(10):269-300.
--Non-novel Indefinites in Adverbial Quantification. In C. Smith (ed). WorkshopProceedings: Nonnarrative Discourse, Department of Linguistics, University ofTexas at Austin. Texas Linguistics Forum,1999.
Kuno, S. Functional Sentence Perspective: A Case Study from Japanese and English.Linguistic Inquiry,1972,3.3,269–320.
--Subject, Theme and the Speaker’s Empathy A Reexamination of RelativizationPhenomena. In Ch. Li (ed.),1976:417–444.
Lambrecht. K. Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: CUP,1994.
Li, C. N.&S. A. Thompson, Subject and Topic: a New Typology of Language. In C.N. Li (ed.) Subject and Topic,457-489. New York: Academic Press,1976.
--An Explanation of Word Order Change from SVO to SOV. Foundations ofLanguage1973,(12):201-214，
--Historical Change of Word Order: a Case Study of Chinese and Its Implications. In J.M. Anderson&Ch. Jones (eds.) Historical Linguistics,1973.
Mathesius, V. A Functional Analysis of Present Day English on a General LinguisticBasis. Transl. by L. Duskova, ed. by J. Vachek. Prague: Academia,1975.(originally published in Czech under the title Obsahovy rozbor soucasneanglictiny na zaklade obecne lingvistickem, Praha,1961)
Nikolaeva, I. Secondary Topic as a Relation in Information Structure. Linguistics2001,39–1:1–49.
Oberlander, J. On the Reduction of Discourse Topic. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):213–225.
Peregrin, J. Topic and Focus in a Formal Framework. In B. Partee and P. Sgall (eds.)Discourse and Meaning: Papers in Honor of Eva Haji ová, Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins,1996.
Prince, E. F. Topicalization, Focus-Movement and Yiddish-Movement: a PragmaticDifferentiation. Berkeley Linguistics Society,1981,(7),249–264.
--Toward a Taxonomy of Given/New Information. In P. Cole(ed.) RadicalPragmatics, New York: Academic Press,1981:223–255.
--Topicalization and Left-dislocation: a Functional Analysis. In S. J. White and V.Teller (eds.) Discourse in Reading and Linguistics Annals of the New YorkAcademy of Sciences,1984,433,213–25.
Reinhart, T. Pragmatics and Linguistics: an Analysis of Sentence Topics. Philosophica,1981,(27):53-94.
Rooth, M. Association with Focus. University of Massachusetts, Amherst,1985.
--A Theory of Focus Interpretation. Natural Language Semantics,1992,(1),75–116.
Russell, B. On Denoting,1905, in A.P. Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language,Oxford: Oxford University Press,2001.
--Descriptions,1919, in A.P. Martinich(ed.) The Philosophy of Language, Oxford:Oxford University Press,2001.
Sgall, P., E. Haji ová&J. Panenová. The Meaning of the Sentence in its Semantic andPragmatic Aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel,1986.
Stede, M. Does Discourse Processing Need Discourse Topics. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):241–253.
Stoyanova, M. Unique Focus: Languages without Multiple Wh-questions.Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,2008.
Sun, C.-F.&T. Givon. On the So-called SOV Word Order in Mandarin Chinese: aQuantified Text Study and Its Implications. Language1985,(61):329-351.
Tai, H.-Y. J. Chinese as a SOV language. In C. Corum et al.(eds.) Papers from theNineth Reginal Meeting of Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: ChicagoUniversity Press,1973.
Tsao, F.-F. A Functional Study of Topic in Chinese: the First Step towards DiscourseAnalysis. Taipei: Student Book Co,1979.
Vallduvi, E. Functional Load, Prosody and Syntax: Left-detachment in Catalan andSpanish. CLS,1988,(24),391–404.
--The Information Component. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,1990.
Ward, G. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Preposing. New York: Garland,1988.
Ward, G. and E. F. Prince, On the Topicalization of Indefinite NPs. Journal ofPragmatics1991,(8):167–178.
Watorek, M.&C. Perdue. Additive Particles and Focus: Observations from Learnerand Native-speaker Production. Linguistics1999,37–2:297–323.
Weil, H. De l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparees aux languesmodernes. Paris: Joubert,1879(1844). Translated as The Order of Words in theAncient Languages compared with that of the Modern Languages. Boston:Ginn&Co.1887by Charles W. Super. Reedited: Amsterdam/Philadelphia: JohnBenjamins1978.
Xu, L.-J. Free empty category. Linguistic Inquiry1986,(17):75-93.
Xu, L.-J.&D. T. Langendoen. Topic Structures in Chinese. Language,1985,(61):1-27.
Xu, Y.-L. Resolving Third-Person Anaphora in Chinese Texts: Towards aFunctional-Pragmatic Model. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Polytechnic University,1995.
Zeevat, H. Asher on Discourse Topic. Theoretical Linguistics2004,(30):203-211.
曹逢甫,《汉语的句子与子句结构》.北京:北京语言大学出版社,1990.
-《-主题在汉语中的功能研究--迈向语段分析的第一步》.谢天蔚译,北京:语文出版社,1995.
陈国华、王建国.汉语的无标记非主语话题.《世界汉语教学》,2010,(3):310-324.
陈虎.语言信息结构及其多视角研究述评.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2003,(5):1-7.
陈嘉映.《语言哲学》.北京:北京大学出版社,2006.
陈姝金.北京话疑问语气词的分布、功能及成因.《中国语文》,1995,(1):17-22.
程丽霞,左偏置结构频率统计与话题结构的显现.《外语教学与研究》,2006,(2):101-107.
--英汉左偏置结构句法、语义对比分析.《外语学刊》,2004,(5):63-67.
崔希亮.把字句的若干句法语义问题.《世界汉语教学》,1995,(3):12-21.
范开泰.语用说略.《中国语文》,1985,(6):11-16.
范晓.三个平面的语法观.北京:北京语言学院出版社,1996.
方梅.北京话句中语气词的功能研究.《中国语文》,1994,(2):129-138.
--汉语对比焦点的句法表现手段.《中国语文》,1995,(4):279-288.
蒋平.是无动把字句还是一种行事句.《中国语文》,2003,(5):419-421.
雷莉.汉语话题标记研究.《西南民族学院学报》,2001,(12):224-227.
--汉语话题的辖域与层级,《中央民族大学学报》,2002,(2):15-20.
李宝伦、潘海华、徐烈炯.对焦点敏感的结构及焦点的语义解释（上）.《当代语言学》,2003,(1):1-11.
--对焦点敏感的结构及焦点的语义解释（下）.《当代语言学》,2003,(2):108-119.
李秉震.汉语话题标记的语义、语用功能研究.南开大学,2010,5.
李大勤.“关系化”对“话题化”的影响—汉语话题结构个案分析.《当代语言学》,2001,(2):127-131.
李临定.主语的语法地位.《中国语文》,1985,(1):15-22.
李英哲、郑良伟、贺上贤、侯炎尧、Larry Foster、Moira Yip.《实用汉语参考语法》.熊文华译,北京:北京语言学院出版社,1990.
刘安国.汉语中的多重主语结构及其句法分析.《现代外语》,1999,(2):21-28.
刘林军、高远.北京话口语中话题化结构和左失位结构分析--兼与英语作类型学对比.《外语教学与研究》,2010,(1):44-51.
刘培玉.把字句的句法、语义和语用分析.《华中师范大学学报》,2002,(5):134-139.
陆俭明.《现代汉语句法论》.北京:商务印书馆，1993.
吕叔湘.《中国文法要略》.北京:商务印书馆，1982.
--《汉语语法分析问题》,收入《汉语语法论文集》.北京：商务印书馆,1984:481-571.
--汉语句法的灵活性.中国语文,1986,(1):34-41.
孟艳丽.也论“把”字句的主题和焦点.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2000,(3):44-46.
聂仁发.不定指话题及其语用策略.《汉语学报》,2005,(2):88-93.
潘建华.每个句子都有焦点吗.《山西师大学报》,2000,(3):123-126.
彭锦维,2001,重庆话语气词的特点,《西南民族学院学报》(7):55-57.
屈承熹.从汉语的焦点与话题看英语中的Y-Movement及其他倒装句.《外语学刊》,1999,(4):1-13.
沈家煊.不对称和标记论.南昌:江西教育出版社,1999.
史有为.主语后停顿与话题《.中国语言学报》,1995,(5):97-123;又载史有为《,汉语如是观》,1997:128–163,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社.
--话题、协同化及话题性.《语言科学》,2005,(3):3-22.
石定栩.主题句研究.载徐烈炯《共性与个性--汉语语言学中的争议》,1–36,北京:北京语言文化大学出版社,1999.
石毓智.汉语的主语与话题之辩，《语言研究》，2001,(2):82-91.
--《语法的形式和理据》.南昌:江西教育出版社,2001.
石毓智、李讷.《汉语语法化的历程———形态句法发展的动因和机制》,北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
王还.《“把”字句和“被”字句》.上海:上海教育出版社,1984.
王力.《中国现代语法》.北京:商务印书馆，1985.
王文晖.近代汉语中的一种特殊把字句.《中国语文》,2001,(4):364-367.
王一敏.把字句的语用结构分析.《上海师范大学学报》,1993,(1):122-124.
文旭.左移位句式的认知解释.《外国语》,2005,(2):45-52.
--话题与话题构式的认知阐释.《重庆大学学报》,2007,(1)：123-130.
吴静、石毓智.英汉主宾语性质的差别及其对话题化的影响.《四川外语学院学报》,2005,(5):74-79.
吴中伟.现代汉语句子的主题研究.北京:北京大学出版社,2004.
徐杰.主语成分、话题特征及相应语言类型.《语言科学》,2003,(1):3-22.
徐烈炯、刘丹青.《话题的结构与功能》.上海:上海教育出版社,2007.
徐通锵.《语言论》,长春:东北师范大学出版社,1997.
--《基础语言学教程》,北京:北京大学出版社,2001.
薛凤生.试论把字句的语义特性.《语言教学与研究》,1987,(1):4-17.
袁毓林.话题化及相关的语法过程.《中国语文》,1996,(4):241-254.
--‘话题的结构与功能’评述.《当代语言学》,2003,(1):54-63.
--句子的焦点结构及其对语义解释的影响.《当代语言学》,2003,(4):323-338.
张斌、范开泰、张亚军.《现代汉语语法分析》,上海:华东师范大学出版社,2000.
张伯江、方梅.汉语口语里的主谓结构.《北京大学学报》,1994,(2):66-75.
--《汉语功能语法研究》.南昌:江西教育出版社,1996.
张大群.主位研究述评.《现代外语》,2009,(3):257-265.
张克定.预设·调核·焦点.《外语学刊》,1999,(4):22-26.
--前置主位的信息状态和语篇功能.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2004,(5):6-9.
张连文.句子主题的所指依存和信息结构层.《四川外语学院学报》,2006,(4):66-71.
张全生.现代汉语焦点结构研究.南开大学,2009.
张孝荣.汉语话题结构中的移位研究.《安徽理工大学学报》(社会科学版),2009,(2):69-72.
赵元任.《汉语口语语法》.1968.吕叔湘译,北京:商务印书馆,1979.
钟华.现代汉语焦点表现手段研究.安徽大学,2007.
周慧先.试析信息焦点及其句法表现手段.《西南民族大学学报》,2005,(6):340-343.
周士宏.信息结构中的对比焦点和对比话题—兼论话题焦点的性质.《解放军外国语学院学报》,2009,(4):12-16.
朱德熙.《语法讲义》.北京：商务印书馆,1982.
--《语法问答》.北京：商务印书馆,1985.