基于语料库的汉英中动结构对比研究
|
摘要
中动结构是一种既常见又特殊的具有跨语言特性的语言现象。中动结构在句法上为主动式而在语义上又隐含着被动的意义。该结构特殊的语法形式、语义属性以及复杂的二元对立特征①,已成为国内外语言学界研究的热点和争议的话题。以往对该结构研究的焦点主要集中在中动结构的生成机制、副词的使用以及时体的限制等方面。然而,在中动结构的界定上仍没有统一的标准,学界从不同的视角衍生出不同的制约标准,如副词效应标准、隐含施事标准、情态语义标准、动词体貌制约标准、主语有责条件、动词影响标准以及论元敏感制约标准等诸多纷繁复杂的制约标准,而且每一种制约标准都能找出违反该标准的反例。为了去繁就简,突破藩篱,以加深对中动结构本质的认识,本文从语言类型学的跨语言视角,在总结和借鉴了国内外对中动结构研究成果的基础上,着眼于对汉英两种语言结构的语义特征、施事论元的隐含动因、中动主语的内在属性等进行整体的全方位的分析和研究。
为了避免在跨语言研究中比附英语、生搬硬套、止于直觉的表观和片面,本文以语料库语言事实的统计为依据,以汉语为本位以英语为参照,排斥主观臆断,以“他山之石,可以攻玉”的理念,参照外位,来充实本位,本文对英汉语料库真实语料的调查、统计进行了定量、定性对比分析,对前人的假说进行了求证,证实了“中动具有跨语言特性”的论点。解决了英汉语中动结构统一的语义特征②以及其定义特征和本质特征的界定问题,明确了研究对象和范围；进而论证了和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]构式的中动地位。通过对比研究,发现了英汉两种语言的中动结构方面所具有的共性和差异：都是介于主动结构与被动结构之间的独立语言构式；都具有“主语有责性”特征③和非事件性特征④；都有凸显受事隐含施事等特征。从语料库的分布情况和使用范围看,英、汉语中动结构都属于口头语言、中动动词多数是日常用语中单音节常用动词；在实际语料中,不只副词／形容词能用于中动词后,介词短语也能用于中动词后来表述主语名词的属性或特征,而且副词／形容词或介词短语的语义指向都不指向隐含的施事等。不同之处：英语动词后多用副词修饰而汉语中动词后多用形容词修饰；语料中发现英语中动结构存在大量光杆动词结构而汉语中没有；在构句条件允准程度方面,汉语比英语宽容度强、能产性高。
论文不但从组合关系入手,在句法结构上将其分为典型的和非典型的两种类型,研究其句法结构和语义表达。文章还从认知的视角,对中动结构进行动态研究,从聚合关系入手,提出了在同一句法位置上的对立归一系统中存在“类指”与“定指”两种类型的中动结构。不但论证了英、汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性,考察了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理,还对国内外普遍认为的所有中动结构都具有类属性和普遍性特征的论点提出了自己的不同观点。通过研究发现“定指”中动结构表述在特定语境下,具象的(实体的)客体主语在动作过程中的属性或状态。指出了只有“类指”中动结构才有类属性、规律性和普遍性的特征。论证了两种语言在“定指”和“类指”中动结构对比分析中有着如下相同的差异：隐含施事认知动因的差异、名词主语语义属性的差异以及语义等级层级的差异。用类指和定指中动结构以及其物性结构,对困扰学界的一些违反界定中动结构标准的反例进行了统一解释。
全文共分六个部分。
第一章作为绪论首先是问题的提出,介绍了研究的对象和内容、研究的目的及意义。该章同时作为文献综述部分,回顾并介绍了国内外不同流派对英、汉语中动结构的相关研究；评述了英、汉语中动结构的研究以及比较研究中所取得的成就及存在的问题。然后提出了指导理论和研究方法,简介了自建双语语料库、美国当代英语语料库以及北京大学现代汉语语料库的情况,最后介绍了语料的来源和结构安排。
第二章英、汉中动结构的语料考察和研究。首先,介绍了自建双语语料库的建设情况。其次,在通用大型语料库和自建英、汉双语平行语料库的支持下,本文作者对语料库的真实语料进行定量分析,给出定性结论。然后,文章统计分析了中动结构在不同语料库中的分布情况,以查证该结构的使用范围和频次。对英语中动结构所对应的汉语结构进行了统计分析和研究,对满足中动结构构句条件的动词以及修饰语进行语料考察、统计和分析,以查证该结构的汉语结构有哪些?最后,采用定性与定量分析相结合、描写与分析相结合的研究方法,论证语料中哪些动词和副词能用于英语中动结构也能/不能与汉语对应?以及它们使用频次的异同。分别对汉英语中动结构的约束条件和中动结构修饰语的类别以及选择制约进行了对比研究。本章的目的是通过呈现在真实语料方面英汉语中动结构的一些独特特征,分别为第三章的中动结构的界定和第五章的汉语中动结构研究提供依据。
第三章中动结构的界定。本章以第二章的语料统计分析的结果为依据,以论元结构理论和认知语言学理论为指导,在前贤们研究成果的基础上,对中动结构进行明确界定,有利于把握该结构的全貌。同时,根据英语中动结构的界定标准,结合在语料库中与英语对应的汉语结构特征,论证和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的中动地位。
第四章对中动结构进行了句法和语义分类。本章从组合关系上,将中动结构分成典型的和非典型的进行研究。还从聚合关系上提出了中动结构存在“类指”与“定指”两种类型。论证了英汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性和差异,考察了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理。
第五章是对汉语中动结构及其语义特征的研究。结合第二章的语料分析,本章对汉语结构“V-起来”与“好-V”的句法和语义特征进行了研究。借鉴英语中动研究中已经达成共识的中动句法标准和中动语义特征,检验汉语非施事主语V-起来句[NP+V-起来+AP](简称S1)和非施事主语“好-V”句[NP+好-V](简称S2),发现这两种句法结构都体现了英语中动结构的所有中动语义特征和非常相似的句法表征。据此,本文在第三章中确立过的这两种汉语中动结构进行构句成分分析和结构层次分析,并从句法特征和语义特征上发现了它们的异同。对句首名词NP的语义属性、谓语动词V的选择限制、以及修饰语AP的语义指向进行全面系统的分析。
第六部分是全文的结语。首先概括了本文研究对比的结果和理论思考,然后阐明本研究的贡献和应用启示,最后说明有待努力之处。
本论文基本的研究方法是基于自建英汉语双语平行语料库和通用语料库的真实语料,进行定量统计与定性分析相结合、描写与分析相结合的方法。“定量”包括英语和中动结构在语料库中存在形式的分布情况、出现频次的定量统计和分析,以及与其对应的汉语中动结构在语料库中存在形式的分布情况、出现频次的定量统计和分析。“定性”包括英汉语中动结构的对应情况的共性和差异的分析,英汉语中动结构语义特征的共性与差异的分析。同时“描写”是定量的基础,“分析”是定性的必由之路,通过内省的方法来弥补语料库统计中的不足。
本研究的创新点主要体现在以下几个方面：
1)以语料库的真实语言统计为依据,以语言类型学理论为指导,解决了中动结构的定义特征和本质特征的界定问题,明确了研究对象和范围；根据通用语料库和自建双语语料库的调查、统计,论证了和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的“中动”地位。
2)在大量语料的支持下,对英、汉语中动结构的特征进行定量、定性分析,对前人的假说进行求证,证实了“中动具有跨语言特性”的论点,以期深化汉语言所具有的共性和差异的本体研究。
3)从聚合关系入手,提出了中动结构的“类指”与“定指”两种类型,不但论证了英、汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性和差异,还分析了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理。就国内外普遍认为的所有“中动结构都具有类属性和普遍性特征”的论点,本文作者以语料库中检测到的真实语料为依据,从主语名词在不同类型中的语义属性和认知动因上论证了该“类属性”论点的偏颇。指出了只有“类指”中动结构才有类属性和普遍性的特征,“定指”的中动结构并不表述这两种遍性特征。论证了两种语言在“定指”和“类指”中动结构对比分析中有着如下相同的差异：隐含施事认知动因的差异、名词主语语义属性的差异以及语义等级层级的差异。
4)对困惑语言学界的复杂的二元对立特征和许多违反界定中动结构标准的反例进行了统一解释①,了解这些特征会有助于更加深刻地探讨中动结构的本质。
不足之处在于,在语料的统计方面,由于在删减不符合构句条件的句子时需要人工操作,可能出现部分数据的偏差；自建英汉双语语料库规模小,达不到海量检索,也可能会出现数据偏差。根据上述不足我们将多次核对、穷尽检索,尽可能地减少偏差；对于自建双语语料库,今后将联合能联合的力量尽可能扩大其规模
Middle Construction (MC), also known as the Middles is a kind of common and special language phenomenon with cross-language properties. It is active in syntactic form and passive in semantic meaning implicitly. The qualities of its special syntactic form, unique semantic properties and complex binary opposition has made the study of MC a wide and controversial reaseach topic in the linguistic circles both at home and abroad since the1980s. The previous studies on MC were mainly concentrated around the mechanism of the structure, the use of adverbs and the selectional restrictions of tenses and aspects. But there is still no normal standard for its proper definiting, resulting in great differences standard from different perspectives in linguistic world, so much complicated constraints, as adverb effect restriction, implicit agent restriction, modal semantic standard. verb effect restriction, non-double-objects restriction, action effects and argument sensitive standard. Each kind of standard, however, can find counterexamples in violation. In order to break through the barriers the complicated constraints and to deepen our understanding the true nature of MCs, this thesis, with the Cross-linguistic perspective of the Linguistic Typology, on the base of the research results in this field achieved at home and abroard, makes the intrinsic properties of the overall comprehensive analysis and research, focusing on the semantic characteristics、implicit-agent in cognitive motivation、the intrinsic properties of both Chinese and English MCs.
In order to avoid cross-language study just applying English MC mechanically, corpus-based quantitative and qualitative analyses on English and Chinese MCs with the concept of" the jade may be refined from stones coming from other hills", that is, theories abroad can be used as reference to enrich the Chinese language study. The cross-language study, from the perspective of typology, is advantageous to the theory of ontology research on Chinese and helpful for the application of Chinese language international promotion. By way of the reasearches on the previous hypothesis on these studies, the argument that "the MCs are of cross-language characteristics" have been confirmed and the characteristics of universality and heterogeneity have been found in Chinese MC. And then according to the investigation and demonstration of the statistics from the corpora, the quantitative and qualitative analyses have been carried out on the corpora characteristics of MCs both in English and Chinese. Thus the status of the Chinese format [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] has been set as the Chinese MCs. Through comparative study, the commonalities and differences have be found. The commonalities are that both English and Chinese MCs are of independent constructions between active and passive structure, of "the subject duty and non events " features, and of highlighted-patient implied-agent characteristics. In the distribution of corpus and range of using, both English and Chinese MCs belong to oral language, and the verbs in MCs are most commonly used in single syllable routinely used verbs; not only adverbs/adjectives can be used after verbs in MCs, but prepositional phrases, the semantic orientation of which pointing to the implicit agents, can also be found to describe attributes or characteristics of the serface subject NP. The differences:adverbs are used to modify after the English verbs while adjectives after Chinese verbs; and in real corpus a lot of bare verb English MCs, that is no modifies after verbs, while no bare verb Chises MCs can be found in corpus; and the degree of consent in the condition of sentences is that Chinese MCs are more tolerant and productive than English MCs.
In this paper, MCs have been classified into typical and atypical models in syntactic structure by the syntagmatic-relation approach. And researches have been made on the syntactic stuctures and semantic expressions of the two models. In addition, the distinction between the two types of MCs, namely,"the generic reference" type and "the definite reference" type, have been put forward by the paradigmatic-relation approach from the perspective of cognition. With an argument on the similarities between the two types of MCs both in English and Chinese, an examination has been conducted on their corresponding semantic changes, pragmatic features and the deep cognitive motivation in the implicit-agents. This method of classification has overturned the beliefs held by most of domestic scholars that all the MCs are characteristic of "genericity" and "universality", which, in fact, is only true of the "the generic reference" middles. In the comparative studies on the two types of MCs, the similar distinctions have been found between English and Chinese: differences between the implicit-agents in cognitive motivation, differences in semantic attributes of the subject noun and the differences of the semantic hierarchy levels. Whereas "the definite reference" functions the contextal representation of object properties or state in the process of the action. And unified interpretations have been made to complex binary opposition and many counter-examples of linguistics and to the features of binary opposition, which have long confused the linguistic field.
The full text of the thesis is divided into six parts.
Chapter One, as the introduction to the whole thesis, is an explanation to the reason of the establishment of the reasearch program as well as an illustration of the research object, content, purpose and significance. The chapter, as a part of literature review, is designed as an introduction to the relative studies on MCs held by the different genres of English and Chinese linguistists both at home and abroad. It is a general review of the studies on English and Chinese MCs as well as a comparative study on the achievements obtained and the problems still existed. Finally, the guiding theory and research methods has been put forward with an interpretation of the source of corpus and structure arrangement.
Chapter Two is an investigation into and an analysis on the corpuses of English and Chinese MCs. With the support of large-scale corpus and the self-built English-Chinese parallel corpus, a research has been carried out on the distribution of and the correspondence with English and Chinese MCs with an investigation into the verbs and the modifiers in the MCs as well in the corpus. First of all, an examination and statistics have been conducted on the corresponding MC structures in Chinese with those in English in bilingual corpus. Secondly, with an investigation into the distribution of the MCs in different corpus, the range and frequency in use of the structures have been verified. Finally, a discussion has been made on how many of the verbs and the adverbs which can be found in English MCs could or couldn't be correspond with those in Chinese MCs in the corpus. The other object of the discussion is the difference of its frequency in use of those verbs and adverbs. A contrastive analysis on English and Chinese sentence conditions of the MCs in corpus is another task of this chapter---comparative studies being made respectively on the constraint conditions, the category of the modifiers and the restricts of choice. By way of description and illustration, a conclusion has been made with qualitative and quantitative analyses in this chapter that the MCs are also a general language phenomenon in Chinese.
Chapter Three, while combing the standards and biased errors in the previous studies on defining MC has presented the significance in strictly definiting MC. And then the contrast researches have been made on the MC structures easy to be confused, and the syntactic semantic standards in defining MC have been put forward with the grammatical category of MC structures being analysized.
Chapter Four is the classification of the MC structures. In this chapter, the classification has been conducted syntactically and semantically. The general MCs are divided into typical and atypical models with the syntagmatic-relation approach so that investigations could be made in Chinese and English MCs. And the distinction between the "the generic reference" and the definite reference types of MCs has been made with paradigmatic-relation approach. As for the the generic reference" and definite reference types of MC, a fruitful discussion have been held on the commonness and differences between English and Chinese MCs.
Chapter Five is a study on the Chinese MCs and their semantic characteristics. A research has been made on the syntactic and semantic features of the Chinese sentence structures "V-qilai起来" and "hao好-V". With the commonly acknowleged syntactic standards and semantic features of MCs obtained in English MC studies as the reference, it is found that the very similar semantic features and syntactic representations in English MCs can be found in the Chinese syntactic structures of "V-qilai"[NP+V-qialai+AP](SI) and the "hao-V"[NP+hao-V](S2). Thus the status of the Chinese format [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] has been set as the Chinese MCs. And the similarities and differences between them are easily distinguished from their syntactic and semantic features. However, a research has been also made on the sentence structures and the hierarchy structures of the patterns. Moreover a sytematic anlysis has been carried out on the semantic properties of NP, the choice restrictions of V, the semantic orientation of AP and the semantic features.
The sixth part of the thesis is the conclusion. It is first a summary of the results of the comparative studies and the theoretical thinking of the author, and then a clarification of the research contributions and application revelation. And the weakpoints of the studies have been revealed at the end of the part.
In this paper, quantitative statistics with qualitative analysis and description with analysis are adopted as the basic research methods by which studies are conducted on the basis of the self-built English-Chinese parallel corpus and the large-scale corpus, such as COCA and the Beijing University Chinese Corpus. The studies in terms of "Quantitative" include the quantitative statistics and analysis on the distribution and frequency of MCs in English corpus as well as those of the corresponding MC in Chinese corpus. And the studies in terms of "Qualitative" include the analysis on the commonness and difference between English and Chinese MCs, especially on their semantic characteristics. Meanwhile "Description" is the basis of quantitative analysis and "Analysis" is the essence of qualitative approach. And the lack of corpus statistics can be compensated by the introspective method.
Innovation points of this research are mainly in the following several aspects:
1) From the perspective of linguistic typology, the problems have been solved in the defining and essential characteristics of MCs, and the research object and scope made clear about. And according to the investigation and the statistics made on the large corpora and the self-built bilingual corpus, the Chinese [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] format have been demonstrated and their status in MC established.
2) With the support of a large corpus, the quantitative and qualitative analyses
on the features of MCs in English and Chinese are helpful to prove the hypothesis of previous patch, offering a confirmation on the argument that "the MCs are of cross-language characteristics," in order to deepen the researches on the universality and heterogeneous ontology of the Chinese language.
3) From the perspective of the syntagmatic and the paradigmatic relations, two types of MCs, namely,"the generic reference" and "the definite reference," have been put forward in this paper. With an argument on the similarities between the two types of MCs both in English and Chinese, an examination has been conducted on their corresponding semantic changes, pragmatic features and the deep cognitive motivation in the implicit-agents.. The beliefs held by most of domestic scholars have been overturned that all the MCs are characteristic of "genericity" and "universality," which, in fact, is only true of the "the generic reference" middles". In the comparative studies on the two types of MCs, the similar distinctions have been found between English and Chinese:differences between the implied agencies in cognitive motivation, differences in semantic attributes of the subject noun and the differences of the semantic hierarchy levels.
4) In oder to help understand the nature of MC more deeply, unified interpretations have been made to complex binary opposition and many counter-examples of linguistics and to the features of binary opposition, which have long confused the linguistic field.
Its insufficients are first in corpus statistics because of some deviation of the data in cutting the sentences not in conformity with the conditions by way of manual operation. And secondly data deviation may occur due to the small capacity of the self-built English-Chinese bilingual corpus which offers no massive amounts of retrieval. According to the shortcomings, the author will try her best to reduce the deviation and to enrich the self-built English-Chinese bilingual corpus in the future.
为了避免在跨语言研究中比附英语、生搬硬套、止于直觉的表观和片面,本文以语料库语言事实的统计为依据,以汉语为本位以英语为参照,排斥主观臆断,以“他山之石,可以攻玉”的理念,参照外位,来充实本位,本文对英汉语料库真实语料的调查、统计进行了定量、定性对比分析,对前人的假说进行了求证,证实了“中动具有跨语言特性”的论点。解决了英汉语中动结构统一的语义特征②以及其定义特征和本质特征的界定问题,明确了研究对象和范围；进而论证了和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]构式的中动地位。通过对比研究,发现了英汉两种语言的中动结构方面所具有的共性和差异：都是介于主动结构与被动结构之间的独立语言构式；都具有“主语有责性”特征③和非事件性特征④；都有凸显受事隐含施事等特征。从语料库的分布情况和使用范围看,英、汉语中动结构都属于口头语言、中动动词多数是日常用语中单音节常用动词；在实际语料中,不只副词／形容词能用于中动词后,介词短语也能用于中动词后来表述主语名词的属性或特征,而且副词／形容词或介词短语的语义指向都不指向隐含的施事等。不同之处：英语动词后多用副词修饰而汉语中动词后多用形容词修饰；语料中发现英语中动结构存在大量光杆动词结构而汉语中没有；在构句条件允准程度方面,汉语比英语宽容度强、能产性高。
论文不但从组合关系入手,在句法结构上将其分为典型的和非典型的两种类型,研究其句法结构和语义表达。文章还从认知的视角,对中动结构进行动态研究,从聚合关系入手,提出了在同一句法位置上的对立归一系统中存在“类指”与“定指”两种类型的中动结构。不但论证了英、汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性,考察了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理,还对国内外普遍认为的所有中动结构都具有类属性和普遍性特征的论点提出了自己的不同观点。通过研究发现“定指”中动结构表述在特定语境下,具象的(实体的)客体主语在动作过程中的属性或状态。指出了只有“类指”中动结构才有类属性、规律性和普遍性的特征。论证了两种语言在“定指”和“类指”中动结构对比分析中有着如下相同的差异：隐含施事认知动因的差异、名词主语语义属性的差异以及语义等级层级的差异。用类指和定指中动结构以及其物性结构,对困扰学界的一些违反界定中动结构标准的反例进行了统一解释。
全文共分六个部分。
第一章作为绪论首先是问题的提出,介绍了研究的对象和内容、研究的目的及意义。该章同时作为文献综述部分,回顾并介绍了国内外不同流派对英、汉语中动结构的相关研究；评述了英、汉语中动结构的研究以及比较研究中所取得的成就及存在的问题。然后提出了指导理论和研究方法,简介了自建双语语料库、美国当代英语语料库以及北京大学现代汉语语料库的情况,最后介绍了语料的来源和结构安排。
第二章英、汉中动结构的语料考察和研究。首先,介绍了自建双语语料库的建设情况。其次,在通用大型语料库和自建英、汉双语平行语料库的支持下,本文作者对语料库的真实语料进行定量分析,给出定性结论。然后,文章统计分析了中动结构在不同语料库中的分布情况,以查证该结构的使用范围和频次。对英语中动结构所对应的汉语结构进行了统计分析和研究,对满足中动结构构句条件的动词以及修饰语进行语料考察、统计和分析,以查证该结构的汉语结构有哪些?最后,采用定性与定量分析相结合、描写与分析相结合的研究方法,论证语料中哪些动词和副词能用于英语中动结构也能/不能与汉语对应?以及它们使用频次的异同。分别对汉英语中动结构的约束条件和中动结构修饰语的类别以及选择制约进行了对比研究。本章的目的是通过呈现在真实语料方面英汉语中动结构的一些独特特征,分别为第三章的中动结构的界定和第五章的汉语中动结构研究提供依据。
第三章中动结构的界定。本章以第二章的语料统计分析的结果为依据,以论元结构理论和认知语言学理论为指导,在前贤们研究成果的基础上,对中动结构进行明确界定,有利于把握该结构的全貌。同时,根据英语中动结构的界定标准,结合在语料库中与英语对应的汉语结构特征,论证和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的中动地位。
第四章对中动结构进行了句法和语义分类。本章从组合关系上,将中动结构分成典型的和非典型的进行研究。还从聚合关系上提出了中动结构存在“类指”与“定指”两种类型。论证了英汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性和差异,考察了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理。
第五章是对汉语中动结构及其语义特征的研究。结合第二章的语料分析,本章对汉语结构“V-起来”与“好-V”的句法和语义特征进行了研究。借鉴英语中动研究中已经达成共识的中动句法标准和中动语义特征,检验汉语非施事主语V-起来句[NP+V-起来+AP](简称S1)和非施事主语“好-V”句[NP+好-V](简称S2),发现这两种句法结构都体现了英语中动结构的所有中动语义特征和非常相似的句法表征。据此,本文在第三章中确立过的这两种汉语中动结构进行构句成分分析和结构层次分析,并从句法特征和语义特征上发现了它们的异同。对句首名词NP的语义属性、谓语动词V的选择限制、以及修饰语AP的语义指向进行全面系统的分析。
第六部分是全文的结语。首先概括了本文研究对比的结果和理论思考,然后阐明本研究的贡献和应用启示,最后说明有待努力之处。
本论文基本的研究方法是基于自建英汉语双语平行语料库和通用语料库的真实语料,进行定量统计与定性分析相结合、描写与分析相结合的方法。“定量”包括英语和中动结构在语料库中存在形式的分布情况、出现频次的定量统计和分析,以及与其对应的汉语中动结构在语料库中存在形式的分布情况、出现频次的定量统计和分析。“定性”包括英汉语中动结构的对应情况的共性和差异的分析,英汉语中动结构语义特征的共性与差异的分析。同时“描写”是定量的基础,“分析”是定性的必由之路,通过内省的方法来弥补语料库统计中的不足。
本研究的创新点主要体现在以下几个方面：
1)以语料库的真实语言统计为依据,以语言类型学理论为指导,解决了中动结构的定义特征和本质特征的界定问题,明确了研究对象和范围；根据通用语料库和自建双语语料库的调查、统计,论证了和确立了汉语中[NP+V-起来+AP]和[NP+好-V]格式的“中动”地位。
2)在大量语料的支持下,对英、汉语中动结构的特征进行定量、定性分析,对前人的假说进行求证,证实了“中动具有跨语言特性”的论点,以期深化汉语言所具有的共性和差异的本体研究。
3)从聚合关系入手,提出了中动结构的“类指”与“定指”两种类型,不但论证了英、汉两种语言在中动结构的类指与定指上具有的共性和差异,还分析了与之对应的语义变化、语用差异以及在隐含施事方面的深层机理。就国内外普遍认为的所有“中动结构都具有类属性和普遍性特征”的论点,本文作者以语料库中检测到的真实语料为依据,从主语名词在不同类型中的语义属性和认知动因上论证了该“类属性”论点的偏颇。指出了只有“类指”中动结构才有类属性和普遍性的特征,“定指”的中动结构并不表述这两种遍性特征。论证了两种语言在“定指”和“类指”中动结构对比分析中有着如下相同的差异：隐含施事认知动因的差异、名词主语语义属性的差异以及语义等级层级的差异。
4)对困惑语言学界的复杂的二元对立特征和许多违反界定中动结构标准的反例进行了统一解释①,了解这些特征会有助于更加深刻地探讨中动结构的本质。
不足之处在于,在语料的统计方面,由于在删减不符合构句条件的句子时需要人工操作,可能出现部分数据的偏差；自建英汉双语语料库规模小,达不到海量检索,也可能会出现数据偏差。根据上述不足我们将多次核对、穷尽检索,尽可能地减少偏差；对于自建双语语料库,今后将联合能联合的力量尽可能扩大其规模
Middle Construction (MC), also known as the Middles is a kind of common and special language phenomenon with cross-language properties. It is active in syntactic form and passive in semantic meaning implicitly. The qualities of its special syntactic form, unique semantic properties and complex binary opposition has made the study of MC a wide and controversial reaseach topic in the linguistic circles both at home and abroad since the1980s. The previous studies on MC were mainly concentrated around the mechanism of the structure, the use of adverbs and the selectional restrictions of tenses and aspects. But there is still no normal standard for its proper definiting, resulting in great differences standard from different perspectives in linguistic world, so much complicated constraints, as adverb effect restriction, implicit agent restriction, modal semantic standard. verb effect restriction, non-double-objects restriction, action effects and argument sensitive standard. Each kind of standard, however, can find counterexamples in violation. In order to break through the barriers the complicated constraints and to deepen our understanding the true nature of MCs, this thesis, with the Cross-linguistic perspective of the Linguistic Typology, on the base of the research results in this field achieved at home and abroard, makes the intrinsic properties of the overall comprehensive analysis and research, focusing on the semantic characteristics、implicit-agent in cognitive motivation、the intrinsic properties of both Chinese and English MCs.
In order to avoid cross-language study just applying English MC mechanically, corpus-based quantitative and qualitative analyses on English and Chinese MCs with the concept of" the jade may be refined from stones coming from other hills", that is, theories abroad can be used as reference to enrich the Chinese language study. The cross-language study, from the perspective of typology, is advantageous to the theory of ontology research on Chinese and helpful for the application of Chinese language international promotion. By way of the reasearches on the previous hypothesis on these studies, the argument that "the MCs are of cross-language characteristics" have been confirmed and the characteristics of universality and heterogeneity have been found in Chinese MC. And then according to the investigation and demonstration of the statistics from the corpora, the quantitative and qualitative analyses have been carried out on the corpora characteristics of MCs both in English and Chinese. Thus the status of the Chinese format [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] has been set as the Chinese MCs. Through comparative study, the commonalities and differences have be found. The commonalities are that both English and Chinese MCs are of independent constructions between active and passive structure, of "the subject duty and non events " features, and of highlighted-patient implied-agent characteristics. In the distribution of corpus and range of using, both English and Chinese MCs belong to oral language, and the verbs in MCs are most commonly used in single syllable routinely used verbs; not only adverbs/adjectives can be used after verbs in MCs, but prepositional phrases, the semantic orientation of which pointing to the implicit agents, can also be found to describe attributes or characteristics of the serface subject NP. The differences:adverbs are used to modify after the English verbs while adjectives after Chinese verbs; and in real corpus a lot of bare verb English MCs, that is no modifies after verbs, while no bare verb Chises MCs can be found in corpus; and the degree of consent in the condition of sentences is that Chinese MCs are more tolerant and productive than English MCs.
In this paper, MCs have been classified into typical and atypical models in syntactic structure by the syntagmatic-relation approach. And researches have been made on the syntactic stuctures and semantic expressions of the two models. In addition, the distinction between the two types of MCs, namely,"the generic reference" type and "the definite reference" type, have been put forward by the paradigmatic-relation approach from the perspective of cognition. With an argument on the similarities between the two types of MCs both in English and Chinese, an examination has been conducted on their corresponding semantic changes, pragmatic features and the deep cognitive motivation in the implicit-agents. This method of classification has overturned the beliefs held by most of domestic scholars that all the MCs are characteristic of "genericity" and "universality", which, in fact, is only true of the "the generic reference" middles. In the comparative studies on the two types of MCs, the similar distinctions have been found between English and Chinese: differences between the implicit-agents in cognitive motivation, differences in semantic attributes of the subject noun and the differences of the semantic hierarchy levels. Whereas "the definite reference" functions the contextal representation of object properties or state in the process of the action. And unified interpretations have been made to complex binary opposition and many counter-examples of linguistics and to the features of binary opposition, which have long confused the linguistic field.
The full text of the thesis is divided into six parts.
Chapter One, as the introduction to the whole thesis, is an explanation to the reason of the establishment of the reasearch program as well as an illustration of the research object, content, purpose and significance. The chapter, as a part of literature review, is designed as an introduction to the relative studies on MCs held by the different genres of English and Chinese linguistists both at home and abroad. It is a general review of the studies on English and Chinese MCs as well as a comparative study on the achievements obtained and the problems still existed. Finally, the guiding theory and research methods has been put forward with an interpretation of the source of corpus and structure arrangement.
Chapter Two is an investigation into and an analysis on the corpuses of English and Chinese MCs. With the support of large-scale corpus and the self-built English-Chinese parallel corpus, a research has been carried out on the distribution of and the correspondence with English and Chinese MCs with an investigation into the verbs and the modifiers in the MCs as well in the corpus. First of all, an examination and statistics have been conducted on the corresponding MC structures in Chinese with those in English in bilingual corpus. Secondly, with an investigation into the distribution of the MCs in different corpus, the range and frequency in use of the structures have been verified. Finally, a discussion has been made on how many of the verbs and the adverbs which can be found in English MCs could or couldn't be correspond with those in Chinese MCs in the corpus. The other object of the discussion is the difference of its frequency in use of those verbs and adverbs. A contrastive analysis on English and Chinese sentence conditions of the MCs in corpus is another task of this chapter---comparative studies being made respectively on the constraint conditions, the category of the modifiers and the restricts of choice. By way of description and illustration, a conclusion has been made with qualitative and quantitative analyses in this chapter that the MCs are also a general language phenomenon in Chinese.
Chapter Three, while combing the standards and biased errors in the previous studies on defining MC has presented the significance in strictly definiting MC. And then the contrast researches have been made on the MC structures easy to be confused, and the syntactic semantic standards in defining MC have been put forward with the grammatical category of MC structures being analysized.
Chapter Four is the classification of the MC structures. In this chapter, the classification has been conducted syntactically and semantically. The general MCs are divided into typical and atypical models with the syntagmatic-relation approach so that investigations could be made in Chinese and English MCs. And the distinction between the "the generic reference" and the definite reference types of MCs has been made with paradigmatic-relation approach. As for the the generic reference" and definite reference types of MC, a fruitful discussion have been held on the commonness and differences between English and Chinese MCs.
Chapter Five is a study on the Chinese MCs and their semantic characteristics. A research has been made on the syntactic and semantic features of the Chinese sentence structures "V-qilai起来" and "hao好-V". With the commonly acknowleged syntactic standards and semantic features of MCs obtained in English MC studies as the reference, it is found that the very similar semantic features and syntactic representations in English MCs can be found in the Chinese syntactic structures of "V-qilai"[NP+V-qialai+AP](SI) and the "hao-V"[NP+hao-V](S2). Thus the status of the Chinese format [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] has been set as the Chinese MCs. And the similarities and differences between them are easily distinguished from their syntactic and semantic features. However, a research has been also made on the sentence structures and the hierarchy structures of the patterns. Moreover a sytematic anlysis has been carried out on the semantic properties of NP, the choice restrictions of V, the semantic orientation of AP and the semantic features.
The sixth part of the thesis is the conclusion. It is first a summary of the results of the comparative studies and the theoretical thinking of the author, and then a clarification of the research contributions and application revelation. And the weakpoints of the studies have been revealed at the end of the part.
In this paper, quantitative statistics with qualitative analysis and description with analysis are adopted as the basic research methods by which studies are conducted on the basis of the self-built English-Chinese parallel corpus and the large-scale corpus, such as COCA and the Beijing University Chinese Corpus. The studies in terms of "Quantitative" include the quantitative statistics and analysis on the distribution and frequency of MCs in English corpus as well as those of the corresponding MC in Chinese corpus. And the studies in terms of "Qualitative" include the analysis on the commonness and difference between English and Chinese MCs, especially on their semantic characteristics. Meanwhile "Description" is the basis of quantitative analysis and "Analysis" is the essence of qualitative approach. And the lack of corpus statistics can be compensated by the introspective method.
Innovation points of this research are mainly in the following several aspects:
1) From the perspective of linguistic typology, the problems have been solved in the defining and essential characteristics of MCs, and the research object and scope made clear about. And according to the investigation and the statistics made on the large corpora and the self-built bilingual corpus, the Chinese [NP+V-qilai+AP] and [NP+hao-V] format have been demonstrated and their status in MC established.
2) With the support of a large corpus, the quantitative and qualitative analyses
on the features of MCs in English and Chinese are helpful to prove the hypothesis of previous patch, offering a confirmation on the argument that "the MCs are of cross-language characteristics," in order to deepen the researches on the universality and heterogeneous ontology of the Chinese language.
3) From the perspective of the syntagmatic and the paradigmatic relations, two types of MCs, namely,"the generic reference" and "the definite reference," have been put forward in this paper. With an argument on the similarities between the two types of MCs both in English and Chinese, an examination has been conducted on their corresponding semantic changes, pragmatic features and the deep cognitive motivation in the implicit-agents.. The beliefs held by most of domestic scholars have been overturned that all the MCs are characteristic of "genericity" and "universality," which, in fact, is only true of the "the generic reference" middles". In the comparative studies on the two types of MCs, the similar distinctions have been found between English and Chinese:differences between the implied agencies in cognitive motivation, differences in semantic attributes of the subject noun and the differences of the semantic hierarchy levels.
4) In oder to help understand the nature of MC more deeply, unified interpretations have been made to complex binary opposition and many counter-examples of linguistics and to the features of binary opposition, which have long confused the linguistic field.
Its insufficients are first in corpus statistics because of some deviation of the data in cutting the sentences not in conformity with the conditions by way of manual operation. And secondly data deviation may occur due to the small capacity of the self-built English-Chinese bilingual corpus which offers no massive amounts of retrieval. According to the shortcomings, the author will try her best to reduce the deviation and to enrich the self-built English-Chinese bilingual corpus in the future.
引文
① Keyser & Roeper(1984),Klaiman(1988,1991),Fagan(1992),Stroik(1992),徐盛桓(2002.06)
① 何学德(2011.12：103)
① 何文忠(2005),古川裕(2003a.)
① 马庆株(1988,2005)；袁毓林(1993)；李临定(198：108-116)曹宏(2004)
[1]Ackema, P. and Schoorlemmer, M. The middle construction and syntax semantics interface [J]. Lingua,1994
[2]Ackema P. and Schoorlemmer, M. Middles and nonmovement [J] Linguistic Inquiry,1995.
[3]Ackema P. and Schoorlemmer, M. Middles [A], in Martin Everaert & Henkvan Riem sdijk (eds.), The Syntax Companion [C], Oxford:Basil Blackwell,2002.
[4]Chung, Taegoo. On English middle formation [J], Studies in Generative Grammar.1996
[5]Declerk, Renaat. A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English [M]. Tokyo:Kaitakusha,1991.
[6]Fagan, The Syntax and Semantics of Middle Constructios:A Study with Special Reference to German [M], Cambridge/MA:MIT Press,1992.
[7]Fellbaum, C. On the Middle Constructions in English [A], Bloomingt on:Indiana University Linguistic Club,1986.
[8]Goldberg, A. Constructions:A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure [M], London:The University of Chicago Press, Ltd.,1995
[9]Goldberg, A. E. Constructions:A new theoretical approach to language [J]. Trends in Cognitive Science,2003
[10]Goldberg, A. Constructions at Work [M], Oxford:OUP,2006
[11]Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M], London: Edward Arnold,1994.
[12]Iwata, S. On the Status of an Implicit Arguments in Middles [J], Journal of Linguistics,1999
[13]Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles [M], Heidelerg:Carl Winter,1914-1929.
[14]Ji Xiaoling 1995 The Middle Construction in English and Chinese, MA thesis of The Chinese University of HongKong.
[15]Kemmer, S. The Middle Voice [M], Amsterdam & Phil adelphia:John Benjamins,1993.
[16]Keyser, S. J., and Roeper, T. On the middle and ergative constructions in English [J], Linguistic Inquiry,1984, (15)
[17]Langacker, R. W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. II:Descriptive Application [M], Stanford:S tanford University Press,1991
[18]Lekakou, M. The Realization of Middle Semantics in English and Greek [A]. UCL working
paper in linguists,2002.
[19]Levin, B. English Verb Classes and Alternation [M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1993.
[20]Massam, D. Null objects and nonthematic subjects [J], Journal of Linguistics, 1982
[21]Perlmutter, David M. Impersonal passives and unaccusative hypothesis[A]. Berkeley Linguistic Society 4[C],1978
[22]Plank, F.1979. Ergativity:Towards a Theory of Grammatical Relations [M]. London:Academic Press Inc. Ltd.
[23]Pustejovsky, J. The Generative Lexicon[M], Cambridge MA, The MIT Press,1995
[24]Roberts, I. The Representation of Implicit Argument and Dethematized Subjects[M]. Dordrecht:Foris,1987.
[25]Steinbach, M. Middles in German [D], PhD dissertation, Humboldt Universitaetzu Berlin.1998.
[26]Stroik,T. Middle and Movement [J], Linguistic Inquiry,1992
[27]Sung Kuoming Chinese Middle Construction [D], PhD dissertation:Case Assignment Under Incorporation, University of Califomia at Los Angeles,1994
[28]Vendler, Z. Linguistics in Philosophy [M], Ithaca Cornell University Press,1967
[29]Zwart, J. Nonargument middles in Dutch [A]. Groninger Arbeitenzur Germanisti schen Linguistik [C],1998
[30]梅冰,基于语料库的英语中动结构的构式语法研究[D],河南大学硕士学位论文2009.04
[31]蔡淑美.汉语广义中动式的结构功能和历时演变[D],新加坡国立大学博士学位论文,2012.
[32]蔡淑美,汉语中动句的研究现状和发展空间[J],汉语学习,2013
[33]曹燕,英语中的非宾格形象[D]四川师范大学硕士论文,2006
[34]曹宏,中动句对动词形容词的选择限制及其理据[J],语言科学,2004
[35]曹宏,动句的句法构造特点[J]世界汉语教学,2004
[36]曹宏.论中动句的语义表达特点[J],中国语文,2005.05
[37]陈昌来,现代汉语动词的句法语义属性研究[J],上海：学林出版社2002
[38]陈立民,汉语的时态和时态成分[J],语言研究2002
[39]陈望道,文法简论[J],上海：上海教育出版社1978
[40]戴曼纯,最简方案框架下的广义左向合并理论研究[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社
[41]丁声树,现代汉语语法讲话[M],商务印书馆,1999
[42]韩景泉,英语中动结构的生成[J],外语教学与研究,2003
[43]何学德,运用语义层级法进行特殊加减法的运算[J],外国语文,2011
[44]何文忠,汉语和西日耳曼语言中的附加语中动结构[J],解放军外国语学院学报,2004
[45]何文忠,中动结构的认知阐释[J],外语研究,2007
[46]何文忠,中动结构的界定[J],外语教学,2005
[47]何文忠、王克非,英语中动结构修饰语的语料库研究[J],语教学与研究,2009
[48]贺阳,动趋式“V起来”的语义分化及其句法表现[J],语言研究2004
[49]胡壮麟,认知隐喻学[J]北京：北京大学出版社2004
[50]黄冬丽,马贝加,S+V起来+AP+VP构式及其来源[J],语文研究,2008
[51]黄月华、左双菊,原型范畴与家族相似性范畴——兼谈原型理论在认知语言学中引发的争议[J],语文研究,2009
[52]高兴刚.空算子与中间结构[J],现代外语,2000
[53]高秀雪,英语中动结构的句法—语义界面研究[J]外语教学与研究,2013
[54]高秀雪,再谈汉语中动结构的界定[J],语言应用研究2011
[55]葛旭媚,现代汉语“NP(受事)+V-起来+AP”句式研究[D],上海师范大学硕士论文,2010
[56]古川裕,现代汉语的“中动语态句式”—语态变换的句法实现和词法实现[J],汉语学报2005
[57]顾阳,论元结构理论介绍[J],国外语言学6第1期1994
[58]郭静.从基本层次范畴的角度看英语中动结构的使用[J],教学与管理2009
[59]龚千炎,谈现代汉语的时制和时态表达系统[J],中国语文,1991
[60]郭锐,汉语动词的过程结构[J],中国语文,1993
[61]郭锐,现代汉语词类研究[M],北京：商务印书馆2002
[62]李宝伦、潘海华、徐烈炯,对焦点的结构及焦点的语义解释[J],当代语言学,2003
[63]李福印,意象图式理论[J],四川外语学院学报,2007
[64]李临定,汉语比较变换语法[M],中国社会科学出版社,1988
[65]李航,VP壳理论框架下的英汉中间结构生成研究[J],文学界(理论版)2011
[66]李红新等,英语中动结构构句核心制约的探讨[J],郑州航空管理学院学报(社会科学版),2011
[67]粱丽,认知语言学中的基本层次范畴及其特征[J],华中科技大学学报,2003
[68]刘丹青,汉语类指成分的语义属性和句法属性[J],中国语文2002
[69]刘玉梅,Goldberg认知构式语法的基本观点：反思与前瞻[J],现代外语,2010
[70]刘月华,趋向补语的语法意义[J],语法研究与探索1988
[71]刘子波,中动句的句法语义研究[D],东北师范大学硕士论文,2006
[72]吕叔湘,现代汉语八百词[M],北京：商务印书馆,1980
[73]蓝红军,英汉中动结构的对比研究[J],江苏科技大学学报(社会科学版),2007
[74]罗瑞球,英语中动结构的句法、语义特征[J],广西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003
[75]马庆株,自主动词和非自主动词[J],中国语言学报,1988
[76]马庆株,汉语动词和动词性结构一编[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005
[77]马应聪,“中动态构式”研究现状问题[J],四川教育学院学报(社科版),2011
[78]南潮,最简方案框架下的中间结构研究[J],湖北师范学院学报(社科版),2009
[79]彭琼、梁丽,基本层次范畴对英语中动结构的诠释[J],外语教育,2004
[80]沈家煊,语用法的语法化[J],福建外语1998
[81]沈家煊,认知与汉语语法研究[M],北京：商务印书馆,2006
[82]沈阳,汉语和汉语研究十五讲[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005
[83]石定栩,话题句的合格条件[C]徐烈炯,刘丹青,2003.
[84]石兴慧等,浅析“V着AP”格式中形容词的特点[J],语言运用研究,2006
[85]石毓智,语法的认知语义基础[M],江西教育出版社,2001
[86]石毓智,论汉语的结构意义和词汇标记之关系[J],当代语言学,2002
[87]宋红梅,“V起来”句作为有形态标记的话题句[J],外语研究,2008
[88]宋国明.句法理论概要[M],北京：中国社会科学出版社,1997
[89]孙丹娜,A Contrastive study of English and Chinese Middle Construction on the Prototype Theory [D],郑州大学硕士学位论文,2012
[90]孙翠兰,中动结构的“类指”和“定指”[J],烟台大学学报(社科版),2013
[91]孙宜春,“NP+V-起来+AP”句式考察[D],安徽师范大学硕士论文,2007
[92]束定芳,认知语义学[M],上海外语教育出版社,2008
[93]王凤娥,陈兵,英语中动构式的认知分析[J],江西师范大学学报,2006
[94]王惠,从及物性系统看现代汉语的句式[J],语言学论丛1997
[95]王健慈,评判动词的语义类[J],中国语文1997
[96]王璐璐,中动结构的类型学考察[J],语文学刊2013
[97]王敏,现代汉语/VP起来的语法语义分析[D],安徽师范大学硕士论文2002
[98]王希杰,汉语修辞学[M],北京：北京出版社19835
[99]王寅,认知构式语法[J],外语学刊2011
[100]王永鹏,“NP+v起来+AP”格式研究[D],上海师范大学优秀硕博论文,2008
[101]吴洁敏,谈谈非谓语动词“起来”[J],语言教学与研究1984
[102]吴锋文,现代汉语中动结构论析[D],华中师范大学硕士论文,2007
[103]夏炎青,英汉语中动结构的隐含施事对比分析[J],荆楚理工学院学报2010
[104]夏晓蓉,英汉中间结构对比分析[J],外语与外语教学,2005
[105]许艾明.英语中动词及物性实质的认知研究[J],外语与外语教学,2008
[106]许艾明,基于语料库的英汉中动构式修饰语之对比研究[J],西安外国语大学学报,2011
[107]徐烈炯,刘丹青,话题的结构与功能[M].上海：上海教育出版社.1995
[108]徐烈炯,题元理论与汉语配价问题[J],当代语言学1998
[109]徐烈炯,刘丹青,话题与焦点新论[M],上海：上海教育出版社.2003
[110]徐盛桓.语义数量特征和英语中动结构[J].外语教学与研究,2002
[111]许余龙.中动结构的认知阐释序[G].北京：科学出版社,2007
[112]许艾明.中动构式的转喻阐释[J],外语,与外语教学,2006
[113]杨素英,从非宾格动词现象看语义与句法结构之间的关系[J],当代语言学,1999
[114]杨晓军,英语中动结构式中副词使用的语料库考察[J],外语教学与研究,2006
[115]殷树林,NP(对象)+(状)+V+起来+AP格式与英语中动句的比较[J].语言教学与研究,2006
[116]殷树林,NP(对象)+(状)+V+起来+AP格式的句法构造[J],语言科学.2006
[117]殷树林,“NP+(状)+V起来+AP”格式与英语中动句的比较语言[J],教学与研究,2006
[118]于芳芳,现代汉语中动句及其习得研究[D],南京师范大学硕士论文,2007
[119]余光武,司慧文,汉语中间结构的界定------兼论“NP+V起来+AP”句式的分化[J],语言研究,2008
[120]俞士汶、段慧明等,北京大学现代汉语语料库基本加工规范[J],《中文信息学报》2002
[121]袁毓林,现代汉语祈使句研究[J],北京：北京北京大学出版,1993
[122]袁毓林,词类范畴的家族相似性[J],中国社会科学,1995
[123]袁毓林,话题化及相关的语法过程[J],中国语文,1998
[124]袁毓林,句子的焦点结构及其对语义解释的影响[J],当代语言学,2003
[125]袁毓林,汉语动词的配价研究[M],南昌：江西教育出版社,1998
[126]袁毓林,论元角色的层级关系和语义特征[J],世界汉语教学,2002
[127]张龙宽、刘晴,英语“中动句”及其相关问题[J].中南大学学报,(社会科学版),2004
[128]张高远、王克非,非施事-er名词与中动结构关系考察[J],现代外语,2008
[129]詹卫东,论元结构与句式转换[J],中国语文,2004
[130]朱晓丽,对英语中动结构的词典学研究[D],北京外国语大学硕士学位论文,2007
[131]周群强,英语被动意义的表达形式一主动形式和中动形式表被动意义[J].武汉科技大学报(社会科学版),2006
[132]张静媛、张冰,英汉中动结构语义特征对比及认知动因研究[J],吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2009
[133]郑伟伟,从基本层次范畴的角度看英语中动结构[J],《说文解字》,2004
[134]朱德熙,语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆,1982
[135]赵艳芳,认知语言学概论[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001
[136]张伯江,认识观的语法表现[J],国外语言学,1997
[137]张伯江,方梅,汉语功能语法研究[M],南昌：江西教育出版社,1995
[138]张斌,新编现代汉语[M],上海：复旦大学出版社,2002
[139]张斌,汉语语法学[M],上海：上海教育出版社,2003
[140]张国宪,论单价形容词词[J],语言研究,1995
[141]张国宪,论双价形容词对句法结构的选择[J],淮北煤炭师范学院,1995
[142]张谊生,评注性副词功能琐议[J],语法研究与探索,2005
[143]赵艳芳,认知语言学概论[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社,1999
[144]赵元任,汉语口语语法[M],北京：商务印书馆,2005
[145]赵运明,英汉中动句研究[D],中国人民解放军外国语学院优秀硕博论文,2002
[146]郑怀德,孟庆海,汉语形容词用法词典[M],北京：商务印书馆,2003
[147]朱德熙,现代汉语形容词研究[J],语言研究,1956
[148]朱德熙,现代汉语语法研究[M],北京：商务印书馆,1980
[149]朱德熙语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆1982
[150]朱乐红,汉语中动句的句法及其语义研究[J],哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)2010
[151]美国当代英语语料库(COCA) http://corpus byu.edu
[152]二语星空英汉双语平行语料[DB/OL] http://www.luweixmu.com/ec-corpus/index.htm.
[153]北京大学语料库(PKU CCL) ccl.pku.edu.cn:8080/ccl corpus
① 何学德(2011.12：103)
① 何文忠(2005),古川裕(2003a.)
① 马庆株(1988,2005)；袁毓林(1993)；李临定(198：108-116)曹宏(2004)
[1]Ackema, P. and Schoorlemmer, M. The middle construction and syntax semantics interface [J]. Lingua,1994
[2]Ackema P. and Schoorlemmer, M. Middles and nonmovement [J] Linguistic Inquiry,1995.
[3]Ackema P. and Schoorlemmer, M. Middles [A], in Martin Everaert & Henkvan Riem sdijk (eds.), The Syntax Companion [C], Oxford:Basil Blackwell,2002.
[4]Chung, Taegoo. On English middle formation [J], Studies in Generative Grammar.1996
[5]Declerk, Renaat. A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English [M]. Tokyo:Kaitakusha,1991.
[6]Fagan, The Syntax and Semantics of Middle Constructios:A Study with Special Reference to German [M], Cambridge/MA:MIT Press,1992.
[7]Fellbaum, C. On the Middle Constructions in English [A], Bloomingt on:Indiana University Linguistic Club,1986.
[8]Goldberg, A. Constructions:A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure [M], London:The University of Chicago Press, Ltd.,1995
[9]Goldberg, A. E. Constructions:A new theoretical approach to language [J]. Trends in Cognitive Science,2003
[10]Goldberg, A. Constructions at Work [M], Oxford:OUP,2006
[11]Halliday, M. A. K. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M], London: Edward Arnold,1994.
[12]Iwata, S. On the Status of an Implicit Arguments in Middles [J], Journal of Linguistics,1999
[13]Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles [M], Heidelerg:Carl Winter,1914-1929.
[14]Ji Xiaoling 1995 The Middle Construction in English and Chinese, MA thesis of The Chinese University of HongKong.
[15]Kemmer, S. The Middle Voice [M], Amsterdam & Phil adelphia:John Benjamins,1993.
[16]Keyser, S. J., and Roeper, T. On the middle and ergative constructions in English [J], Linguistic Inquiry,1984, (15)
[17]Langacker, R. W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. II:Descriptive Application [M], Stanford:S tanford University Press,1991
[18]Lekakou, M. The Realization of Middle Semantics in English and Greek [A]. UCL working
paper in linguists,2002.
[19]Levin, B. English Verb Classes and Alternation [M], Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1993.
[20]Massam, D. Null objects and nonthematic subjects [J], Journal of Linguistics, 1982
[21]Perlmutter, David M. Impersonal passives and unaccusative hypothesis[A]. Berkeley Linguistic Society 4[C],1978
[22]Plank, F.1979. Ergativity:Towards a Theory of Grammatical Relations [M]. London:Academic Press Inc. Ltd.
[23]Pustejovsky, J. The Generative Lexicon[M], Cambridge MA, The MIT Press,1995
[24]Roberts, I. The Representation of Implicit Argument and Dethematized Subjects[M]. Dordrecht:Foris,1987.
[25]Steinbach, M. Middles in German [D], PhD dissertation, Humboldt Universitaetzu Berlin.1998.
[26]Stroik,T. Middle and Movement [J], Linguistic Inquiry,1992
[27]Sung Kuoming Chinese Middle Construction [D], PhD dissertation:Case Assignment Under Incorporation, University of Califomia at Los Angeles,1994
[28]Vendler, Z. Linguistics in Philosophy [M], Ithaca Cornell University Press,1967
[29]Zwart, J. Nonargument middles in Dutch [A]. Groninger Arbeitenzur Germanisti schen Linguistik [C],1998
[30]梅冰,基于语料库的英语中动结构的构式语法研究[D],河南大学硕士学位论文2009.04
[31]蔡淑美.汉语广义中动式的结构功能和历时演变[D],新加坡国立大学博士学位论文,2012.
[32]蔡淑美,汉语中动句的研究现状和发展空间[J],汉语学习,2013
[33]曹燕,英语中的非宾格形象[D]四川师范大学硕士论文,2006
[34]曹宏,中动句对动词形容词的选择限制及其理据[J],语言科学,2004
[35]曹宏,动句的句法构造特点[J]世界汉语教学,2004
[36]曹宏.论中动句的语义表达特点[J],中国语文,2005.05
[37]陈昌来,现代汉语动词的句法语义属性研究[J],上海：学林出版社2002
[38]陈立民,汉语的时态和时态成分[J],语言研究2002
[39]陈望道,文法简论[J],上海：上海教育出版社1978
[40]戴曼纯,最简方案框架下的广义左向合并理论研究[M],北京：外语教学与研究出版社
[41]丁声树,现代汉语语法讲话[M],商务印书馆,1999
[42]韩景泉,英语中动结构的生成[J],外语教学与研究,2003
[43]何学德,运用语义层级法进行特殊加减法的运算[J],外国语文,2011
[44]何文忠,汉语和西日耳曼语言中的附加语中动结构[J],解放军外国语学院学报,2004
[45]何文忠,中动结构的认知阐释[J],外语研究,2007
[46]何文忠,中动结构的界定[J],外语教学,2005
[47]何文忠、王克非,英语中动结构修饰语的语料库研究[J],语教学与研究,2009
[48]贺阳,动趋式“V起来”的语义分化及其句法表现[J],语言研究2004
[49]胡壮麟,认知隐喻学[J]北京：北京大学出版社2004
[50]黄冬丽,马贝加,S+V起来+AP+VP构式及其来源[J],语文研究,2008
[51]黄月华、左双菊,原型范畴与家族相似性范畴——兼谈原型理论在认知语言学中引发的争议[J],语文研究,2009
[52]高兴刚.空算子与中间结构[J],现代外语,2000
[53]高秀雪,英语中动结构的句法—语义界面研究[J]外语教学与研究,2013
[54]高秀雪,再谈汉语中动结构的界定[J],语言应用研究2011
[55]葛旭媚,现代汉语“NP(受事)+V-起来+AP”句式研究[D],上海师范大学硕士论文,2010
[56]古川裕,现代汉语的“中动语态句式”—语态变换的句法实现和词法实现[J],汉语学报2005
[57]顾阳,论元结构理论介绍[J],国外语言学6第1期1994
[58]郭静.从基本层次范畴的角度看英语中动结构的使用[J],教学与管理2009
[59]龚千炎,谈现代汉语的时制和时态表达系统[J],中国语文,1991
[60]郭锐,汉语动词的过程结构[J],中国语文,1993
[61]郭锐,现代汉语词类研究[M],北京：商务印书馆2002
[62]李宝伦、潘海华、徐烈炯,对焦点的结构及焦点的语义解释[J],当代语言学,2003
[63]李福印,意象图式理论[J],四川外语学院学报,2007
[64]李临定,汉语比较变换语法[M],中国社会科学出版社,1988
[65]李航,VP壳理论框架下的英汉中间结构生成研究[J],文学界(理论版)2011
[66]李红新等,英语中动结构构句核心制约的探讨[J],郑州航空管理学院学报(社会科学版),2011
[67]粱丽,认知语言学中的基本层次范畴及其特征[J],华中科技大学学报,2003
[68]刘丹青,汉语类指成分的语义属性和句法属性[J],中国语文2002
[69]刘玉梅,Goldberg认知构式语法的基本观点：反思与前瞻[J],现代外语,2010
[70]刘月华,趋向补语的语法意义[J],语法研究与探索1988
[71]刘子波,中动句的句法语义研究[D],东北师范大学硕士论文,2006
[72]吕叔湘,现代汉语八百词[M],北京：商务印书馆,1980
[73]蓝红军,英汉中动结构的对比研究[J],江苏科技大学学报(社会科学版),2007
[74]罗瑞球,英语中动结构的句法、语义特征[J],广西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2003
[75]马庆株,自主动词和非自主动词[J],中国语言学报,1988
[76]马庆株,汉语动词和动词性结构一编[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005
[77]马应聪,“中动态构式”研究现状问题[J],四川教育学院学报(社科版),2011
[78]南潮,最简方案框架下的中间结构研究[J],湖北师范学院学报(社科版),2009
[79]彭琼、梁丽,基本层次范畴对英语中动结构的诠释[J],外语教育,2004
[80]沈家煊,语用法的语法化[J],福建外语1998
[81]沈家煊,认知与汉语语法研究[M],北京：商务印书馆,2006
[82]沈阳,汉语和汉语研究十五讲[M],北京：北京大学出版社,2005
[83]石定栩,话题句的合格条件[C]徐烈炯,刘丹青,2003.
[84]石兴慧等,浅析“V着AP”格式中形容词的特点[J],语言运用研究,2006
[85]石毓智,语法的认知语义基础[M],江西教育出版社,2001
[86]石毓智,论汉语的结构意义和词汇标记之关系[J],当代语言学,2002
[87]宋红梅,“V起来”句作为有形态标记的话题句[J],外语研究,2008
[88]宋国明.句法理论概要[M],北京：中国社会科学出版社,1997
[89]孙丹娜,A Contrastive study of English and Chinese Middle Construction on the Prototype Theory [D],郑州大学硕士学位论文,2012
[90]孙翠兰,中动结构的“类指”和“定指”[J],烟台大学学报(社科版),2013
[91]孙宜春,“NP+V-起来+AP”句式考察[D],安徽师范大学硕士论文,2007
[92]束定芳,认知语义学[M],上海外语教育出版社,2008
[93]王凤娥,陈兵,英语中动构式的认知分析[J],江西师范大学学报,2006
[94]王惠,从及物性系统看现代汉语的句式[J],语言学论丛1997
[95]王健慈,评判动词的语义类[J],中国语文1997
[96]王璐璐,中动结构的类型学考察[J],语文学刊2013
[97]王敏,现代汉语/VP起来的语法语义分析[D],安徽师范大学硕士论文2002
[98]王希杰,汉语修辞学[M],北京：北京出版社19835
[99]王寅,认知构式语法[J],外语学刊2011
[100]王永鹏,“NP+v起来+AP”格式研究[D],上海师范大学优秀硕博论文,2008
[101]吴洁敏,谈谈非谓语动词“起来”[J],语言教学与研究1984
[102]吴锋文,现代汉语中动结构论析[D],华中师范大学硕士论文,2007
[103]夏炎青,英汉语中动结构的隐含施事对比分析[J],荆楚理工学院学报2010
[104]夏晓蓉,英汉中间结构对比分析[J],外语与外语教学,2005
[105]许艾明.英语中动词及物性实质的认知研究[J],外语与外语教学,2008
[106]许艾明,基于语料库的英汉中动构式修饰语之对比研究[J],西安外国语大学学报,2011
[107]徐烈炯,刘丹青,话题的结构与功能[M].上海：上海教育出版社.1995
[108]徐烈炯,题元理论与汉语配价问题[J],当代语言学1998
[109]徐烈炯,刘丹青,话题与焦点新论[M],上海：上海教育出版社.2003
[110]徐盛桓.语义数量特征和英语中动结构[J].外语教学与研究,2002
[111]许余龙.中动结构的认知阐释序[G].北京：科学出版社,2007
[112]许艾明.中动构式的转喻阐释[J],外语,与外语教学,2006
[113]杨素英,从非宾格动词现象看语义与句法结构之间的关系[J],当代语言学,1999
[114]杨晓军,英语中动结构式中副词使用的语料库考察[J],外语教学与研究,2006
[115]殷树林,NP(对象)+(状)+V+起来+AP格式与英语中动句的比较[J].语言教学与研究,2006
[116]殷树林,NP(对象)+(状)+V+起来+AP格式的句法构造[J],语言科学.2006
[117]殷树林,“NP+(状)+V起来+AP”格式与英语中动句的比较语言[J],教学与研究,2006
[118]于芳芳,现代汉语中动句及其习得研究[D],南京师范大学硕士论文,2007
[119]余光武,司慧文,汉语中间结构的界定------兼论“NP+V起来+AP”句式的分化[J],语言研究,2008
[120]俞士汶、段慧明等,北京大学现代汉语语料库基本加工规范[J],《中文信息学报》2002
[121]袁毓林,现代汉语祈使句研究[J],北京：北京北京大学出版,1993
[122]袁毓林,词类范畴的家族相似性[J],中国社会科学,1995
[123]袁毓林,话题化及相关的语法过程[J],中国语文,1998
[124]袁毓林,句子的焦点结构及其对语义解释的影响[J],当代语言学,2003
[125]袁毓林,汉语动词的配价研究[M],南昌：江西教育出版社,1998
[126]袁毓林,论元角色的层级关系和语义特征[J],世界汉语教学,2002
[127]张龙宽、刘晴,英语“中动句”及其相关问题[J].中南大学学报,(社会科学版),2004
[128]张高远、王克非,非施事-er名词与中动结构关系考察[J],现代外语,2008
[129]詹卫东,论元结构与句式转换[J],中国语文,2004
[130]朱晓丽,对英语中动结构的词典学研究[D],北京外国语大学硕士学位论文,2007
[131]周群强,英语被动意义的表达形式一主动形式和中动形式表被动意义[J].武汉科技大学报(社会科学版),2006
[132]张静媛、张冰,英汉中动结构语义特征对比及认知动因研究[J],吉首大学学报(社会科学版),2009
[133]郑伟伟,从基本层次范畴的角度看英语中动结构[J],《说文解字》,2004
[134]朱德熙,语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆,1982
[135]赵艳芳,认知语言学概论[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社,2001
[136]张伯江,认识观的语法表现[J],国外语言学,1997
[137]张伯江,方梅,汉语功能语法研究[M],南昌：江西教育出版社,1995
[138]张斌,新编现代汉语[M],上海：复旦大学出版社,2002
[139]张斌,汉语语法学[M],上海：上海教育出版社,2003
[140]张国宪,论单价形容词词[J],语言研究,1995
[141]张国宪,论双价形容词对句法结构的选择[J],淮北煤炭师范学院,1995
[142]张谊生,评注性副词功能琐议[J],语法研究与探索,2005
[143]赵艳芳,认知语言学概论[M],上海：上海外语教育出版社,1999
[144]赵元任,汉语口语语法[M],北京：商务印书馆,2005
[145]赵运明,英汉中动句研究[D],中国人民解放军外国语学院优秀硕博论文,2002
[146]郑怀德,孟庆海,汉语形容词用法词典[M],北京：商务印书馆,2003
[147]朱德熙,现代汉语形容词研究[J],语言研究,1956
[148]朱德熙,现代汉语语法研究[M],北京：商务印书馆,1980
[149]朱德熙语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆1982
[150]朱乐红,汉语中动句的句法及其语义研究[J],哈尔滨工业大学学报(社会科学版)2010
[151]美国当代英语语料库(COCA) http://corpus byu.edu
[152]二语星空英汉双语平行语料[DB/OL] http://www.luweixmu.com/ec-corpus/index.htm.
[153]北京大学语料库(PKU CCL) ccl.pku.edu.cn:8080/ccl corpus