论文部分内容阅读
本文通过考察宾语隐形时的语义与语用特征,得出如下结论:1)RappaportHovav&Levin(1998)关于致使性动词使用的第一个限制条件——受事论元必须表达出来——是错误的或至少是部分错误;2)Rice(1988)和Dixon(1991)用单纯考察动词本身语义的方法不可能提出令人信服的解释;3)宾语隐形不仅仅受动词语义表征的影响,宾语本身的语义与语用特征也起至关重要的作用,这一结论不同于Fillmore(1986)的观点:宾语的省略在动词的语义表征中标记出来。
By examining the semantic and pragmatic features of the object invisibility, we draw the following conclusions: 1) Rappaport Hovav & Levin (1998), the first constraint on the use of verbs, that the subject matter argument must be expressed is erroneous or Is at least partly wrong; 2) Rice (1988) and Dixon (1991) can not provide convincing explanations simply by examining the verb’s own semantics; 3) the object’s invisibility is not only influenced by the semantic representation of the verb, but also by the semantics of the object itself And pragmatic features also play a crucial role, this conclusion is different from the view of Fillmore (1986): the omission of the object marked in the verbal semantic representation.