Abstract 摘要
Both characters 得 and 的 have been used to represent the particle in what Chao calls ‘predicative complements’ in sentences such as Ta zou de kuai. Inconsistencies have been found in the syntactic analyses (by Chao and Gao Ming-kai, for instance) of constructions containing predicative complements, which indeed have arisen from the non-uniformity of usage concerning the character for the particle and the subsequent confusion. This paper attempts to prove through internal structural evidence as well as cross-dialect comparison that the true identity of the particle involved is 得, which differs from the potential particle 得 in both its syntactic behavior in questions and its phonological representation with respect to stress. After a transitive verb, both the predicative particle 得 and the nominalizer 的 may occur. This is, perhaps, the source of the previous confusion. Chao’s predicative complements, complements of extent, and resultative complements (in V-R compounds) are ultimately reduced to the same underlying structure, ‘complements of result or extent’. When the complement is a sentence or a verb carrying a scalar notion (such as ‘half-dead’, ‘slow’), particle 得 which signals the meaning ‘to the effect/extent that’ occurs between the main verb and the complement (e.g., Ta qi de bansi). When the complement is a verb carrying a categorical notion (such as ‘dead’, ‘finished’), no particle occurs in between (e.g., Ta qi si le).

在＂他走 de 快＂这种句子里，de 这个虚词有时侯是写成＂得＂，也有时侯是写成＂的＂．学者们（如赵元任，高名凯二位）对这类句子的分析都不无可疑之处．本文通过文法结构上的迹象及与其它方言的比较，证明在上述包含不及物动词的句子里的＂de＂应该是＂得＂而不是＂的＂．在及物动词之后（如＂你做de对＂），述词性的＂得＂与规定词（高名凯用语; nominalizer）的＂的＂都可能出现而意义自然不同．这个述辞性的＂得＂与可能性的＂得＂在重音与问句结构上都有所不同．赵元任的述词补语，结果补语，程度补语都可以归纳到同一底层结构．＂结果与程度补语＂．当一个句子里的补语是一个子句或一个表示一种程度概念的动词（如＂半死＂，＂慢＂），则在主要动词与补语之间需要有一个表示结果或程度的虚词＂得＂（如＂他气得半死＂）．当句子里的补语是一个表示一种绝对概念的动词（如：＂死＂,＂完＂），＂得＂字就无须出现（如＂他气死了＂）。