论文部分内容阅读
本文讨论汉语定语小句中是否存在“关系小句”和“名词补足语小句”的区分。首先从定语小句是否存在空位以及空位的类型对定语小句进行分类,发现汉语中存在有空位和无空位两种定语小句。并根据定语小句中空位论元的语义角色将有空位小句区分为“论元空位定语小句、附加语空位定语小句”和“伪无空位定语小句”三类;根据名词中心语的类型将无空位定语小句区分为“内容义定语小句”和“事件义定语小句”两类。之后,通过话题化、同类叠加、异类叠加和指称功能等方面对几类不同的定语小句进行测试。结果发现,有空位定语小句和无空位定语小句在句法功能上存在明显差异。最终本文认为,汉语中的两类定语小句可以分别对应于类型学中的“关系小句”和“名词补足语小句”。
This article discusses whether there is a discrepancy between the clauses of “clauses” and the clauses of “clauses of complement” in Chinese attributive clauses. Firstly, we classify the attributive clauses from the existence of empty spaces and the types of empty spaces in the attributive clauses, and find that there are two attributive clauses of empty space and no space in Chinese. According to the semantic role of empty argument in the attributive clause, the empty clause is divided into three categories: “empty space attributive clause”, “additional empty space attributive clause” and “pseudo - empty space attributive clause” According to the type of noun central language, we divide vacant attributive clauses into two categories: “clause” and “event clause”. Afterwards, several different attributive clauses were tested in terms of topics, similar superposition, heterogeneous superposition and reference functions. The result shows that there are obvious differences in the syntactic functions between the empty clause and the non-empty attributive clause. In the end, this paper argues that two kinds of attributive clauses in Chinese can correspond to “clauses ” and “clauses in complements ” in typology respectively.