现代汉语名词谓语句的句法研究
|
摘要
关于现代汉语名词谓语句,国内已有60多年的研究历史(陈满华2006),本文在这一系列研究的基础之上,结合国外学者对非动词谓语句研究取得的成果,主要从句法层面对汉语中名词谓语句存在的合理性进行了论证。
第一章主要介绍了论文的研究对象和研究问题。名词谓语句指的是一切不需要借助动词的帮助,以名词或名词性结构(如名词性偏正结构,数量名结构等)来担任谓语的句子。论文旨在通过对现代汉语名词谓语句的分析,来证明现代汉语中名词单独作谓语并不违反普遍语法。
第二章主要从历时和共时两个角度简单回顾了国内对名词谓语句的研究成果,并介绍了与我们的研究相关的国外学者的理论。
第三章是论文的主体部分,我们主要从句法层面分别对汉语中名词谓语句存在的可能性与可行性进行了论证。
在论证可能性时,我们主要是通过英汉对比的方法。一方面,在生成语法的框架下,词库里的单词都带有各种不同的屈折特征,这些特征进入计算系统之后必须通过核查,将不可解读特征删除之后才能被拼读出来,然后和其他成分结合生成合法的句子。相对于汉语,英语词库里单词的各种显性的屈折特征较多,其中一些特征,例如名词代词的主格特征应当由附加在动词之上的时态和一致短语来核查。汉语是孤立语(宋在晶2008),词库中词语缺乏显性的形态标记,根据推导经济原则,我们可以假定这些词所带有的特征经历的是一个隐性的核查过程,在这一过程中,动词可以不用强制出现。另一方面,英汉语的时间表达方式不同。英语表达时间以时态为主,词汇手段仅起辅助作用。附加在动词上的时态是强制使用的,时间词语是可选择性的。汉语恰恰相反,以词汇手段为主,没有时态的屈折形式。从这一方面来讲,汉语中动词也无需强制出现。通过这两方面的对比可以看出,在汉语句子中,动词并不总是强制出现的,这就为名词作谓语提供了可能。
主谓关系是句子中最为本质的一种关系,如果这种关系得不到实现,便无法形成合格的句子。接下来我们通过讨论名词谓语句中NP1(名词谓语句中的主语)与NP2(作谓语的名词或名词性结构)主谓关系的实现问题论证名词作谓语的可行性。按照Chierchia的述谓语法和Bowers的述谓句法理论,具备性质义的语类如果要成为句子的谓语,必须先经过一个谓词化操作,将性质π转化为命题函数,才能与主语结合生成合法的句子。根据他们的理论,我们通过分析汉语中名词谓语句的句法表现,推导出了这一句型的谓词化操作过程。对于含有限定成分的NP2来说,NP2前的限定成分除了表达实际意义之外,还起到了谓词性算子的作用,通过谓词化操作将具有性质义的名词提升为一个命题函数,再与主语结合生成合法的句子。还有一部分名词谓语句含有时间词、语气词或情态意义,对于它们而言,由于时间词、语气词和情态意义所约束的都是命题,所以从句法上讲,它们所选择的补语应该是一个述谓短语PrP (Predicate Phrase),于是激活了隐性的谓词性算子,使得名词从性质π转化为命题函数,然后与主语结合生成合法的句子。
第四章是对第三章的补充,第三章已经证明了现代汉语中,名词作谓语既是可能的,也是可行的。但是符合句法的句子在生成之后并非都能进入言语交际之中,在具体的语言使用中,名词谓语句能否出现还要受到语义、语用、语音等诸多非句法因素的制约。因此,在这一章,我们简要分析了影响名词谓语句存在的非句法因素。
最后一章是论文的总结部分。我们主要指出了本研究的意义,局限性以及今后的研究方向。
Nominal predicate sentences have been studied for up to 60 years in China (Chen 2006). Based on these studies and the achievements of foreign studies on non-verbal predicate sentences, this thesis attempts to demonstrate the reasonability of Chinese nominal predicate sentences.
Chapter 1 is concerned with the introduction of the research object and research questions. Nominal predicate sentences refer to all sentences in which nouns or nominal structures (e.g. nouns with modifiers, numeral-classifier-noun structures and so forth) occupy the position of predicates, without the help of verbs. By analyzing modern Chinese nominal predicate sentences, we attempt to demonstrate that the existence of nominal predicate sentences does not violate universal grammar.
Chapter 2 is literature review. In this chapter, we briefly review the previous studies on Chinese nominal predicate sentences and some foreign theories that will contribute to our study.
Chapter 3 is the main part of this thesis. In this chapter, we will demonstrate the possibility and feasibility of the existence of nominal predicate sentences.
In the demonstration of possibility, we compare some differences between English and Chinese. On the one hand, within the frameworks of generative grammar, words carry various inflectional features in lexicon. When these words come to the computational system, their inflectional features must be checked, and only when the uninterpretable features are erased can the words be spelled out and combine with other words to form a grammatically correct sentence. Compared with Chinese, English words carry rich inflectional features, among which, for example, the [Nom] case feature of nouns and pronouns must be checked by INFL which are attached to verbs. However, Chinese is an isolated language (Song 2008). Words are lacking in overt morphological features. According to economy principle, we might posit that the covert features undergo a covert checking process in which verbs are not compulsory to occur. On the other hand, English and Chinese apply different ways to express time. In English, people use tense to express time, with time words playing the secondary role. Therefore, tense attached to verbs is compulsive, while temporal words are optional. In Chinese, we mainly use lexical means to express time and there are no inflectional tense forms. In this respect, verbs are not compulsory, either. By comparison, we can draw the conclusion that in Chinese, verbs are not forced to appear in some sentences, which provides nominal structures with the possibility to act as the predicates.
Predication relation is the most important relation in a sentence. If this relation can't be realized, the sentence will be ill formed. So subsequently, we will demonstrate the feasibility of nominal predicate sentences by analyzing the realization of the predication relation of NP1 (the subject) and NP2 (the nominal predicate). According to the grammar of predication by Chierchia (1985,1989) and the syntax of predication by Bowers (1993), if categories denoting properties are to become predicates, they must undergo a predication operation which transfers the property n to a propositional function, and then merge with the subject to form a qualified sentence. According to their theory, we summarize the syntactic representations of Chinese nominal predicate sentences and then derive their process of predication operation. For NP2 with modifiers before them, in addition to conveying semantic meanings, the modifiers also play the role of predication operators, which raise NP2 denoting properties to a propositional function. Then NP2 merges with the subject to form a sentence. There also exists another kind of nominal predicate sentences, which carry temporal particles or mood particles, or modality sense. Since what temporal or mood particles or modality sense bind are propositions, syntactically, they require predicative phrases as their complements. In this way, the covert predication operator is activated and it raises NP2 from the propertyπto a propositional function. NP2 then merges with the subject to form a correct sentence.
Chapter 4 is a supplement of Chapter 3. In Chapter 3 we have demonstrated that it is not only possible but also feasible for nouns and nominal structures to be predicates. But whether a syntactically well formed sentence has the chance to enter the communication field depends on several factors. In authentic use of language, the existence of nominal predicate sentences is equally restricted by semantics, pragmatics, phonetics and other non-syntactic factors. In this chapter, we will have a brief analysis on these factors.
Chapter 5 is the conclusion. In this chapter, we mainly point out the significance of this study, the limitations and prospects for future studies.
第一章主要介绍了论文的研究对象和研究问题。名词谓语句指的是一切不需要借助动词的帮助,以名词或名词性结构(如名词性偏正结构,数量名结构等)来担任谓语的句子。论文旨在通过对现代汉语名词谓语句的分析,来证明现代汉语中名词单独作谓语并不违反普遍语法。
第二章主要从历时和共时两个角度简单回顾了国内对名词谓语句的研究成果,并介绍了与我们的研究相关的国外学者的理论。
第三章是论文的主体部分,我们主要从句法层面分别对汉语中名词谓语句存在的可能性与可行性进行了论证。
在论证可能性时,我们主要是通过英汉对比的方法。一方面,在生成语法的框架下,词库里的单词都带有各种不同的屈折特征,这些特征进入计算系统之后必须通过核查,将不可解读特征删除之后才能被拼读出来,然后和其他成分结合生成合法的句子。相对于汉语,英语词库里单词的各种显性的屈折特征较多,其中一些特征,例如名词代词的主格特征应当由附加在动词之上的时态和一致短语来核查。汉语是孤立语(宋在晶2008),词库中词语缺乏显性的形态标记,根据推导经济原则,我们可以假定这些词所带有的特征经历的是一个隐性的核查过程,在这一过程中,动词可以不用强制出现。另一方面,英汉语的时间表达方式不同。英语表达时间以时态为主,词汇手段仅起辅助作用。附加在动词上的时态是强制使用的,时间词语是可选择性的。汉语恰恰相反,以词汇手段为主,没有时态的屈折形式。从这一方面来讲,汉语中动词也无需强制出现。通过这两方面的对比可以看出,在汉语句子中,动词并不总是强制出现的,这就为名词作谓语提供了可能。
主谓关系是句子中最为本质的一种关系,如果这种关系得不到实现,便无法形成合格的句子。接下来我们通过讨论名词谓语句中NP1(名词谓语句中的主语)与NP2(作谓语的名词或名词性结构)主谓关系的实现问题论证名词作谓语的可行性。按照Chierchia的述谓语法和Bowers的述谓句法理论,具备性质义的语类如果要成为句子的谓语,必须先经过一个谓词化操作,将性质π转化为命题函数
第四章是对第三章的补充,第三章已经证明了现代汉语中,名词作谓语既是可能的,也是可行的。但是符合句法的句子在生成之后并非都能进入言语交际之中,在具体的语言使用中,名词谓语句能否出现还要受到语义、语用、语音等诸多非句法因素的制约。因此,在这一章,我们简要分析了影响名词谓语句存在的非句法因素。
最后一章是论文的总结部分。我们主要指出了本研究的意义,局限性以及今后的研究方向。
Nominal predicate sentences have been studied for up to 60 years in China (Chen 2006). Based on these studies and the achievements of foreign studies on non-verbal predicate sentences, this thesis attempts to demonstrate the reasonability of Chinese nominal predicate sentences.
Chapter 1 is concerned with the introduction of the research object and research questions. Nominal predicate sentences refer to all sentences in which nouns or nominal structures (e.g. nouns with modifiers, numeral-classifier-noun structures and so forth) occupy the position of predicates, without the help of verbs. By analyzing modern Chinese nominal predicate sentences, we attempt to demonstrate that the existence of nominal predicate sentences does not violate universal grammar.
Chapter 2 is literature review. In this chapter, we briefly review the previous studies on Chinese nominal predicate sentences and some foreign theories that will contribute to our study.
Chapter 3 is the main part of this thesis. In this chapter, we will demonstrate the possibility and feasibility of the existence of nominal predicate sentences.
In the demonstration of possibility, we compare some differences between English and Chinese. On the one hand, within the frameworks of generative grammar, words carry various inflectional features in lexicon. When these words come to the computational system, their inflectional features must be checked, and only when the uninterpretable features are erased can the words be spelled out and combine with other words to form a grammatically correct sentence. Compared with Chinese, English words carry rich inflectional features, among which, for example, the [Nom] case feature of nouns and pronouns must be checked by INFL which are attached to verbs. However, Chinese is an isolated language (Song 2008). Words are lacking in overt morphological features. According to economy principle, we might posit that the covert features undergo a covert checking process in which verbs are not compulsory to occur. On the other hand, English and Chinese apply different ways to express time. In English, people use tense to express time, with time words playing the secondary role. Therefore, tense attached to verbs is compulsive, while temporal words are optional. In Chinese, we mainly use lexical means to express time and there are no inflectional tense forms. In this respect, verbs are not compulsory, either. By comparison, we can draw the conclusion that in Chinese, verbs are not forced to appear in some sentences, which provides nominal structures with the possibility to act as the predicates.
Predication relation is the most important relation in a sentence. If this relation can't be realized, the sentence will be ill formed. So subsequently, we will demonstrate the feasibility of nominal predicate sentences by analyzing the realization of the predication relation of NP1 (the subject) and NP2 (the nominal predicate). According to the grammar of predication by Chierchia (1985,1989) and the syntax of predication by Bowers (1993), if categories denoting properties are to become predicates, they must undergo a predication operation which transfers the property n to a propositional function
Chapter 4 is a supplement of Chapter 3. In Chapter 3 we have demonstrated that it is not only possible but also feasible for nouns and nominal structures to be predicates. But whether a syntactically well formed sentence has the chance to enter the communication field depends on several factors. In authentic use of language, the existence of nominal predicate sentences is equally restricted by semantics, pragmatics, phonetics and other non-syntactic factors. In this chapter, we will have a brief analysis on these factors.
Chapter 5 is the conclusion. In this chapter, we mainly point out the significance of this study, the limitations and prospects for future studies.
引文
[1]Bowers, J. The Syntax of Predication. Linguistic Inquiry,1993 (24),591-656.
[2]Chierchia, G. Formal Semantics and the Grammar of Predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 1985 (16),417-443.
[3]Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge:MIT Press,1965.
[4]Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge:MIT Press,1995.
[5]Higginbotham, J. Indefiniteness and Predication. In Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen(eds.) The Representation of (in)definiteness. Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press,1987: 43-70.
[6]Ouhalla, J. Introducing Transformational Grammar:from Principles and Parameters to Minimalism (2nd edition). Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Researching Press, 1999.
[7]Partee, S. Predicational "be". In R.C.Blight and M.J.Moosally, Texas Linguistic Forum 38:The Syntax and Semantics of Predication,1997:281-93.
[8]Radford, Andrew. Syntax:A Minimalist Introduction. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000.
[9]Rothstein, S. Predicates and Their Subjects. Kluwer:Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
[10]Tang, Sze-wing. Parameterization of Features in Syntax. Doctoral Dissertation. University of California, Irvine,1998.
[11]Tang, Sze-wing. Nomical Predication and Focus Anchoring. Appeared in ZAS Papers in Linguistics,2000.
[12]Zaring, L. Two "be " or not two "be":Identity, Predication and the Welsh Copular. Linguistics and Philosophy,1996:103-142.
[13]曹洪雷.现代汉语体词谓语句研究述评[J].黑龙江教育学院学报,2008,(1)：731-831.
[14]程工.语言共性论[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,1999.
[15]陈建民.现代汉语里的名词谓语句[J].语文杂志,1980,(5).
[16]陈建民.现代汉语句型论[M].北京：语文出版社,1986.
[17]陈满华.60年来的体词谓语句研究述评[J].汉语学习,2006,(2)：42-49.
[18]陈新义.名词性谓语句的语义分析[D].内蒙古大学,2004.
[19]陈勇.名词谓语句研究综述[J].安徽广播电视大学学报,2005,(2)：92-94.
[20]陈一,赵惜微.谓词性成分作主语的体词谓语句[J].北方论丛,1998,(1)：98-102.
[21]戴曼纯.句法运算中的经济原则[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(2)：132-139.
[22]邓思颖.经济原则和汉语没有动词的句子[J].现代汉语,2002,(1)：2-13.
[23]邓思颖.空动词从属小句的特点[J].汉语学报,2004,(1)：23-32.
[24]丁雪欢.指人名词充当主语的名词谓语句[J].汕头大学学报,1994,(1)：48-52.
[25]丁声树等.现代汉语语法讲话[M].北京：商务印书馆,1961.20-22.
[26]杜瑞银.“定名谓语”存在句[J].汉语学习,1982,(4)：9-15.
[27]范晓.汉语的句子类型[M].上海：上海辞书出版社,1998.
[28]冯嘉成.浅谈现代汉语中具有描写意义的名词性谓语句[J].四川师范学院学报,1997,(3)：54-57.
[29]冯凭.关于名词单独充当谓语的问题[J].锦州师院学报,1980,(3)：67-69.
[30]冯凭.谈名词充当谓语[J].汉语学习,1986,(3)：21-22.
[31]高名凯.汉语句法论[M].上海：开明书店,1948.
[32]高名凯.语法理论[M].北京：商务印书馆,1960.
[33]郝思瑾.名词谓语句形式研究[J].徐州教育学院学报,2007,(3)：89-99.
[34]老舍.断魂枪[C].北京：京华出版社,2006.
[35]李黎.现代汉语名词谓语句研究[D].山西大学,2007.
[36]李临定.现代汉语句型[M].北京：商务印书馆,1986.
[37]刘绍棠.私访记[M].北京：作家出版社,1957.
[38]刘顺.影响名词谓语自足的语言形式[J].汉语学习,2001,(5)：18-22.
[39]刘顺.现代汉语名词的多视角研究[M].上海：学林出版社,2003.
[40]刘月华等.实用现代汉语语法[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,1983.
[41]鲁迅.彷徨.北京：北新书局出版社,1926.
[42]吕叔湘.汉语语法分析问题[M].北京：商务印书馆,1979.
[43]吕叔湘.语法学习[M].北京：中国青年出版社,1953.
[44]吕叔湘.中国文法要略[M].北京：商务印书馆,1982.
[45]马庆株.顺序义对体词语法功能的影响[J],中国语言学报,1991,(4).
[46]沈家煊.“有界”和”无界”[J].中国语文,1995,(5)：367-379.
[47]石定栩.汉语句法的灵活性和句法理论[J].当代语言学,2000,(1)：18-26.
[48]石定栩.体词谓语句的结构和意义[A].汉语语法研究的新拓展[C].杭州：杭州教育出版社,2002.
[49]石毓智.现代汉语谓语结构的有界性及其历史成因[A].面临新世纪挑战的现代汉语语法研究[C].济南：山东教育出版社,2000.
[50]宋玉柱.定心谓语存在句[J].语言教学与研究,1982,(3)：27-32.
[51]宋玉柱.名词谓语存在句[J].徐州师范学报,1988,(4)：87-90.
[52]宋在晶.语言类型学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[53]谭景春.名形词义转变的语义基础和相关问题[J].中国语文,1998,(5)：368-377.
[54]王洁.论”省略述语动词”的体词谓语句[J].大理师专学报,2000,(4)：49-54.
[55]王洁.再论”省略述语动词”的体词谓语句[J].辽宁师专学报,2000,(4)：25-29.
[56]王珏.现代汉语名词研究[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[57]王世群.现代汉语名词性谓语句研究[D].武汉大学,2004.
[58]温宾利.当代句法学导论[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2002..
[59]温锁林,郝蕾.体词谓语句的范围[J].山西大学学报.1995,(3)：66-71.
[60]吴正基.体词谓语句研究说略[J].上海大学学报.2003,(2)：28-31.
[61]项开喜.体词谓语句的功能透视[J].汉语学习,2001,,(1)：13-17.
[62]邢福义.说”NP”了句式[J].语文研究,1984,(3)：21-26.
[63]徐烈炯.1988.生成语法理论[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,1988.
[64]叶长荫.体词谓语句[A].汉语论文集[C].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1987.
[65]臧倩一.体词谓语句的生成原因探讨[D].东北师范大学,2005.
[66]张庆文.现代汉语名词谓语句的句法语义分析[D].北京语言大学,2004.
[67]张志公.汉语语法常识[M].北京：中国青年出版社,1953.
[68]赵元任.汉语口语语法[M].北京：商务印书馆,1979.54-57.
[69]周国辉.汉语的隐形谓语与英语的显性谓语[J].外语与外语教学,2002,(4)：40-43.
[70]周日安.体词谓语句的分类[J].赣南师院学报.1994,(1)：49-53.
[71]周日安.体词谓语句的生成条件[J].佛山大学学报.1996,(6)：49-55.
[72]朱德熙.说“的”[J].中国语文.1961,(12)：23-26.
[73]朱德熙.语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆,1982.
[2]Chierchia, G. Formal Semantics and the Grammar of Predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 1985 (16),417-443.
[3]Chomsky, N. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge:MIT Press,1965.
[4]Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge:MIT Press,1995.
[5]Higginbotham, J. Indefiniteness and Predication. In Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen(eds.) The Representation of (in)definiteness. Cambridge, Mass:MIT Press,1987: 43-70.
[6]Ouhalla, J. Introducing Transformational Grammar:from Principles and Parameters to Minimalism (2nd edition). Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Researching Press, 1999.
[7]Partee, S. Predicational "be". In R.C.Blight and M.J.Moosally, Texas Linguistic Forum 38:The Syntax and Semantics of Predication,1997:281-93.
[8]Radford, Andrew. Syntax:A Minimalist Introduction. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000.
[9]Rothstein, S. Predicates and Their Subjects. Kluwer:Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
[10]Tang, Sze-wing. Parameterization of Features in Syntax. Doctoral Dissertation. University of California, Irvine,1998.
[11]Tang, Sze-wing. Nomical Predication and Focus Anchoring. Appeared in ZAS Papers in Linguistics,2000.
[12]Zaring, L. Two "be " or not two "be":Identity, Predication and the Welsh Copular. Linguistics and Philosophy,1996:103-142.
[13]曹洪雷.现代汉语体词谓语句研究述评[J].黑龙江教育学院学报,2008,(1)：731-831.
[14]程工.语言共性论[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,1999.
[15]陈建民.现代汉语里的名词谓语句[J].语文杂志,1980,(5).
[16]陈建民.现代汉语句型论[M].北京：语文出版社,1986.
[17]陈满华.60年来的体词谓语句研究述评[J].汉语学习,2006,(2)：42-49.
[18]陈新义.名词性谓语句的语义分析[D].内蒙古大学,2004.
[19]陈勇.名词谓语句研究综述[J].安徽广播电视大学学报,2005,(2)：92-94.
[20]陈一,赵惜微.谓词性成分作主语的体词谓语句[J].北方论丛,1998,(1)：98-102.
[21]戴曼纯.句法运算中的经济原则[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(2)：132-139.
[22]邓思颖.经济原则和汉语没有动词的句子[J].现代汉语,2002,(1)：2-13.
[23]邓思颖.空动词从属小句的特点[J].汉语学报,2004,(1)：23-32.
[24]丁雪欢.指人名词充当主语的名词谓语句[J].汕头大学学报,1994,(1)：48-52.
[25]丁声树等.现代汉语语法讲话[M].北京：商务印书馆,1961.20-22.
[26]杜瑞银.“定名谓语”存在句[J].汉语学习,1982,(4)：9-15.
[27]范晓.汉语的句子类型[M].上海：上海辞书出版社,1998.
[28]冯嘉成.浅谈现代汉语中具有描写意义的名词性谓语句[J].四川师范学院学报,1997,(3)：54-57.
[29]冯凭.关于名词单独充当谓语的问题[J].锦州师院学报,1980,(3)：67-69.
[30]冯凭.谈名词充当谓语[J].汉语学习,1986,(3)：21-22.
[31]高名凯.汉语句法论[M].上海：开明书店,1948.
[32]高名凯.语法理论[M].北京：商务印书馆,1960.
[33]郝思瑾.名词谓语句形式研究[J].徐州教育学院学报,2007,(3)：89-99.
[34]老舍.断魂枪[C].北京：京华出版社,2006.
[35]李黎.现代汉语名词谓语句研究[D].山西大学,2007.
[36]李临定.现代汉语句型[M].北京：商务印书馆,1986.
[37]刘绍棠.私访记[M].北京：作家出版社,1957.
[38]刘顺.影响名词谓语自足的语言形式[J].汉语学习,2001,(5)：18-22.
[39]刘顺.现代汉语名词的多视角研究[M].上海：学林出版社,2003.
[40]刘月华等.实用现代汉语语法[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,1983.
[41]鲁迅.彷徨.北京：北新书局出版社,1926.
[42]吕叔湘.汉语语法分析问题[M].北京：商务印书馆,1979.
[43]吕叔湘.语法学习[M].北京：中国青年出版社,1953.
[44]吕叔湘.中国文法要略[M].北京：商务印书馆,1982.
[45]马庆株.顺序义对体词语法功能的影响[J],中国语言学报,1991,(4).
[46]沈家煊.“有界”和”无界”[J].中国语文,1995,(5)：367-379.
[47]石定栩.汉语句法的灵活性和句法理论[J].当代语言学,2000,(1)：18-26.
[48]石定栩.体词谓语句的结构和意义[A].汉语语法研究的新拓展[C].杭州：杭州教育出版社,2002.
[49]石毓智.现代汉语谓语结构的有界性及其历史成因[A].面临新世纪挑战的现代汉语语法研究[C].济南：山东教育出版社,2000.
[50]宋玉柱.定心谓语存在句[J].语言教学与研究,1982,(3)：27-32.
[51]宋玉柱.名词谓语存在句[J].徐州师范学报,1988,(4)：87-90.
[52]宋在晶.语言类型学[M].北京：北京大学出版社,2008.
[53]谭景春.名形词义转变的语义基础和相关问题[J].中国语文,1998,(5)：368-377.
[54]王洁.论”省略述语动词”的体词谓语句[J].大理师专学报,2000,(4)：49-54.
[55]王洁.再论”省略述语动词”的体词谓语句[J].辽宁师专学报,2000,(4)：25-29.
[56]王珏.现代汉语名词研究[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[57]王世群.现代汉语名词性谓语句研究[D].武汉大学,2004.
[58]温宾利.当代句法学导论[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2002..
[59]温锁林,郝蕾.体词谓语句的范围[J].山西大学学报.1995,(3)：66-71.
[60]吴正基.体词谓语句研究说略[J].上海大学学报.2003,(2)：28-31.
[61]项开喜.体词谓语句的功能透视[J].汉语学习,2001,,(1)：13-17.
[62]邢福义.说”NP”了句式[J].语文研究,1984,(3)：21-26.
[63]徐烈炯.1988.生成语法理论[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,1988.
[64]叶长荫.体词谓语句[A].汉语论文集[C].哈尔滨：黑龙江人民出版社,1987.
[65]臧倩一.体词谓语句的生成原因探讨[D].东北师范大学,2005.
[66]张庆文.现代汉语名词谓语句的句法语义分析[D].北京语言大学,2004.
[67]张志公.汉语语法常识[M].北京：中国青年出版社,1953.
[68]赵元任.汉语口语语法[M].北京：商务印书馆,1979.54-57.
[69]周国辉.汉语的隐形谓语与英语的显性谓语[J].外语与外语教学,2002,(4)：40-43.
[70]周日安.体词谓语句的分类[J].赣南师院学报.1994,(1)：49-53.
[71]周日安.体词谓语句的生成条件[J].佛山大学学报.1996,(6)：49-55.
[72]朱德熙.说“的”[J].中国语文.1961,(12)：23-26.
[73]朱德熙.语法讲义[M],北京：商务印书馆,1982.