Journal of Chinese Linguistics Vol.16 – 1988

Volume 16, No 1

Article 文章

Abstract 摘要
In this paper we investigate four types of NP-Movement rules in Mandarin Chinese. Our purpose is to find some universal constraint(s) for all four types, so that we can reduce structural description to a minimum. In doing this investigation we apply the Subjacency Condition, the Specific Subject Condition, and the Tensed Sentence Condition which generative linguists for the theory of Government and Binding have been claiming as universal constraints. Our empirical result shows that these constraints are not relevant for the Chinese cases; instead, the A-over-A principle, which is not always observed in English movement rules, has been found to function as a universal constraint for all four types of NP-Movement in Chinese. We also venture our opinion based on these findings.

在本文中,作者调查了汉语中四种不相同的名词移动规则,目的是想找出一些共同必须遵守的原则,籍以减少对个别结构方面的描写。在调查中,我们试用了生成语言学派 (Generative Linguistics) 认为必须遵行的三个普遍条件,也就是同层次或次层次条件 (the Subjacency Condition), 特殊主词条件 (the Specific Subject Condition), 时态句子条件 (the tensed Sentence Condition)。根据调查结果,我们发现这三个条件都不适用于中文,相反地,在英语中并不是受到普遍遵守的相同词类原则 (the A-over-A principle) 却一致地适用于汉语中各种名词移动规则。作者在结论一章中,就调查结果对目前盛行的语言学理论表示了他的看法。

Abstract 摘要
This paper details a study of the use of the marker de by two groups of two-year-old children acquiring Mandarin as their first language. The study focuses on whether these children acquire the lexically headless or headed form first, and whether the acquisition of a lexical head is related to the form of the modifying complement. The matrix embedding of de structures is also examined. The study found that children learning Mandarin acquire the lexically headless form first, and that the acquisition of the headed form is related to the complexity of the modifying complement. Pragmatic factors, as well as constraints on length and specificity, are evaluated as an explanation for the prior appearance of headless forms. It is suggested that children produce the headless forms first because of incomplete control of dominance relations that obtain between a head and its modifier.

本文是探讨以普通话为母语的儿童在学习‘的’字结构中的语言习得问题。主要研究项目是试图探明儿童是先学无中心成分的‘的’字结构还是先学有中心成分的‘的’字结构,并探究习得该结构的中心成分是否与其修饰成分的形式有关。本项研究还进而探讨了儿童语言习得中‘的’字结构的主句嵌入的问题。经过两组二岁和二岁半儿童自然语言资料的分析后,我们发现:儿童最初学用无中心成份的‘的’字结构,而后学用有中心成分的‘的’字结构。并发现有中心成分的‘的’字结构的习得是与该结构修饰成分的复杂性有关的。为说明我们的发现,本项研究从语言实用,句子的长短以及句子的特指性等方面进行了实验和测定。最后本文的结论是:儿童所以先习得无中心成分的‘的’字结构,其原因是在习得这种结构的最初阶段中,还没有完全掌握其中修饰成分与被修饰成分之间的支配与被支配的关系。

Abstract 摘要
The semantic relations of disposal constructions using “把/将” in the Sui-Tang period can be divided into three types: the simple disposal, the placing disposal and the giving disposal. The simple disposal first appeared in the verses of the Tang Dynasty. The other two can be traced back to the pre-Qin period. Before the Sui-Tang period, the placing disposal construction was contained in sentences with “於/于”; the giving disposal construction was contained both in sentences with “於/于” and in sentences with “以”. In the Sui-Tang period, the disposal construction with “将/把” began to take over the other two forms. Finally, it became the only sentence pattern in spoken Chinese to express ‘disposal’, thus ending the complex relationship between grammatical constructions and semantic relations in the expression of “disposal”.

隋唐“将/把”处置式表达的语义关系可以细分为三种:“纯处置”,“处置到”和“处置给”。“纯处置”在唐代伴随介词“将/把”用于诗句而产生;“处置到”和“处置给”则源远流长。先秦至隋唐以前,“处置到”用“於/于”句表达;“处置给”既用“以”字句表达又用“於/于”句表达。进入隋唐,“将/把”处置式开始接替“於/于”句和“以”字句表“处置”的职能,并最终在口语中取代了旧形式而成为表达“处置”的唯一格式,从而结束了 隋唐以前在“处置”方面语法形式和语义关系对应的犬牙交错状态。

Abstract 摘要
Cai and jiu in Mandarin Chinese sometimes appear synonymous with one another and sometimes antonymous. The diversity in interpreting cai and jiu in various contexts is accounted for by treating these two words as quantificational adverbs which place four types of focus on some element involved in speech: parametric, limiting, emphatic, and temporal. Cai marks a denying-expectation focusing while jiu marks a simple focus. Pragmatic notions such as scalar implicature, the Gricean maxim of quantity, and the principle of relevance, are utilized to derive the various interpretations of these two words from their general meaning. Integrating semantics and pragmatics both recovers the systematic relation between cai and jiu, and allows for a unified analysis of the uses of these two adverbs.

“才”和“就”在汉语中有时象同义词但有时又象反义词。本文把这两个词处理成数量副词来分析两者之间的异同。这两个副词与下述四个方面有关,即语用性的,限止性的,强调性的和时间性的。“才”用来作‘否认-预期’的表示,“就”用来作‘简单’的表示。象程度暗含,关连原则等语用的概念被用在解释这两个词除了基本意义以外的变化。语义和语用的综合分析找出了“才”和“就”之间的系统关系,并能对这两个副词的用法有一个统一的解释。

Abstract 摘要
The study analyses the fundamental frequency contours for the tones in two varieties of the Yao language, Guo-Shan Yao (one of the Iu Mien varieties), and Ba-Pai Yao (one of the Yau Min varieties), spoken in northern Guangdong Province in China. The results of the analysis are compared with the data described in the earlier studies of other varieties of both Iu Mien and Yau Min. The tones in all the Iu Mien varieties spoken in and outside China are similar, except in Guo-Shan Yao the number of the long tones is one less. There are discrepancies in the description of the tones in Yau Min between this and previous studies. Between Guo-Shan Yao and Ba-Pai Yao, there are differences as well as similarities in fundamental frequency contour for different tonal categories.

本文分析 Guo-Shan 瑶语和 Ba-Pai 瑶语声调的基频曲线。 分析的结果与早先其它的瑶语研究作了比较。在中国境内和境外的 Iu Mien 瑶语的声调基本相同,只是 Guo-Shan 瑶语的长调少了一个。但在 Yau Min 瑶语的声调上,我们的结果与早先的研究有较大的出入。在 Guo-Shan 和 Ba-Pai 瑶语之间, 不同调类的基频曲线既有相异之处也有相同之处。

Abstract 摘要
A great deal of current research in language planning has been undertaken in recent years. Language standardization in terms of properties and functions is a topic widely discussed and studied. So far, Western ascendancy has motivated many developing countries to implement language modernization processes, such as standardization, lexical modernization or script reform. This article discusses the modernization of the Chinese language, both in Taiwan and Mainland China. Some problems which surfaced during the planning processes are examined in the light of functional theories, which provides us with evidence to an integrated understanding of lingering problems. Suggestions and directions are also offered for future research and study to help make standardization and modernization successful realities in the near future.

近年来,社会语言学者不断地从事各种语言计划的研究工作,尤其是标准语性质及其社会语言功能的探讨更为广泛。现在,西方国家的优势已经促使许多开发中的国家着手进行语言现代化的工作。词汇标准化,现代化及文字改革就是例子。本文探讨近年来台湾及中国大陆中文现代化工作,并从标准语的性质和社会语言功能上对汉语现代化过程中出现的问题作了探讨,并对问题本身作进一步的了解。本文同时提出了一些建议和探讨方向,以期能对日后现代化工作有所裨益。

Abstract 摘要
It is generally admitted that there is a small group of Chinese adjectives which refer invariably to constant, unchangeable qualities. On the formal level, these “absolute” adjectives, as opposed to “scalar” adjectives, are defined as being incompatible with intensifiers and can supposedly neither function as predicates without being followed by NP modification marker de nor enter a comparison. The only way to assign a property expressed by an absolute adjective would be a resort to shi…de equational sentence (pseudo-cleft). It is demonstrated here that these so-called “absolute” adjectives can, almost always, provided there is a suitable context, have a scalar acceptation. Therefore the opposition ‘absolute’ versus ‘scalar’ doesn’t simply amount to divide, once for all, the adjectives into two mutually exclusive sub-groups. For the same adjective the one or the other interpretation is a question of context, and possibly of the locutor’s intentions, but not merely a problem of intrinsic meaning of that adjective. Thus, there is no ground for establishing a special class of lexical items labeled “absolute adjectives”. If, nevertheless, the term “absolute adjective” were to be preserved it should be clearly understood as alluding only to the high statistical probability of certain adjectives to occur in shi…de equationals, and not as referring to a lexical category with specific grammatical characteristics. It is claimed that whatever the quality an adjective designates may be, it is a priori susceptible of two interpretations: variable or invariable, depending on the physical and cultural properties of the notions to which it is ascribed and/or on the aspect brought out by the locutor in one particular situation.

一般以为中文有一小部分形容词是一直拥有永恒不变的性质的。在形式上,这些“绝对”形容词与“程度”形容词相对,被定义为无法与“程度副词”一起出现,也不能出现在一个比较句里,并且当作谓语时,必须有“的”字后置。唯一用来决定绝对形容词特性的方法是凭借“是…….的”形式的等式句 (pseudo-cleft)。本文提出的证明是,此类所谓的“绝对”形容词如在适宜的上下文中,几乎都具有程度的意义,因此,“绝对”与“程度”就不是形容词两个互不相容的次词组。同一个形容词的某种意义或其它含义都是上下文的问题,或者视说话者的意向而定,而不是仅仅属于一个形容词的本身的含意。由于,对于已经定名为“绝对形容词”无法重新命一特殊名称,在使用这一名称时一定要作说明,即它仅存于较高的统计频率,一部分则属于“是……的”形式的形容词,而不是一个具有特殊语法特性的词汇范畴。

Memoriam 缅怀

Report 报告

Publication 出版

Announcement 消息

Index 索引

Volume 16, No 2

Article 文章

Abstract 摘要
In English and other Western languages, conditional sentences are normally either counterfactual (if he were …) or non-counterfactual (if he is…). Chinese conditionals usually do not distinguish these two types, and many linguists believe that the language never marks counterfactuality at all. It turns out, however, that using the negator bu shi instead of mei(you) or bu in a conditional clause often turns it into a counterfactual. Thus, although Chinese normally does not make the counterfactuality distinction, it is not true that it never does. This article discusses the use of the counterfactual construction in Modern Chinese, with some glimpses into Early Mandarin and Classical Chinese. Finally, it points out several important differences between the Chinese counterfactual and the English one.

英语中的“If he is ….” 和“If he were …” 两个句型是有所分别的,后者表示所谓“违反事实的假设”。在汉语中,“If he is …” 和 “If he were …” 都是用一个句型来代表的,即“如果他是 …..”。因此,有许多语言学家以为,汉语没有“违反事实的假设”标记,在大部分的情况之下,汉语确实没有这样的标记。然而,若用‘不是’来否定假设从句,这常常表示违反事实的假设。本文讨论现代汉语中违反事实的假设,也提到其在早期白话和古汉语中的用法,最后分析违反事实的假设在汉语与英语中所扮演角色的一些重要差别。

Abstract 摘要
One controversy in Chinese syntax has been the category status of such ‘locative particles’ as shang or li in zhuozi shang ‘on the table’ or wuzi li ‘in the room’: some scholars have called them postpositions, others have considered them nouns. In this paper I offer arguments for the former position. Whichever alternative is chosen, such words will be atypical members of the category, so it is necessary to specify theoretical mechanisms to account for their atypical properties. If shang, li, etc., are considered nouns, we will be forced to say (a) that head nouns in a highly isolating language may be obligatorily bound, and (b) that a noun may obligatorily have a relational, non-referential function. Both of these devices are extremely unusual and undesirable. On the other hand, if these words are postpositions, the only crucial devices are (c) an unusual subcategorization option, where the preposition zai takes a PP object (in e.g. zai zhuozi shang) and (d) allowing adpositions to follow their objects, in a language where verbs and prepositions normally precede their objects. I show that both (c) and (d) may be accommodated fairly easily in syntactic theory, and that therefore we are dealing with genuine (albeit somewhat unusual) postpositions.

‘上’,‘里’等“方位词”(如在‘桌上’,‘屋里’中)的类属是中文语法中有争议的问题之一。有些学者把它们称为‘后置词’,也有人把它们视为名词。本文支持前一种看法。无论把这些词归入哪一类,它们在该类中都会是非典型的成员。因此,必须明确用什么样的理论机制才能解释这些词的非典型特征。如果把‘里’‘上’等词当作名词,那就只好说(a)在孤立语中,中心名词可以是强制附着的;(b)有些名词可以有纯关系性,非指涉性的功能。这两种方法都难以令人满意。但如果把这些词看作‘后置词’那么需要补充的机制就只有(c)一种特殊的下位范畴分类,即在‘在’后可以加pp宾语(如:在桌子上);(d)在宾语后允许介词。(中文里介词通常出现在宾语之前.)可以证明,(c)和(d)在句法理论中是相当容易接受的;因此,‘上’,‘里’等词应该是名副其实(尽管有些异常)的‘后置词’。

Abstract 摘要
Tone is the main suprasegmental feature of Chinese. The musical rhythm and melody of traditional Chinese poems and vocal music works are built on the basis of tones of characters. This paper attempted to reconstruct the four tones in the Song Dynasty on the basis of musical scores attached to the seventeen ci (词) written by the famous poet and musician Jiang Baishi (姜白石 1155-1221). Since ci (词)is poetry written to certain tunes with strict tonal patterns and rhyme schemes, the rising and falling of music scales in the procession of music compositions may help us reconstruct the patterns of the tones. The proposed contours of the four tones are as follows: level, falling, rising and fast closing level.

宋姜夔(约1155-1221)着《白石道人歌曲》六卷,其中有十七首词自注旁谱,这是现存唯一的宋词乐谱。它所注的是当时的俗字谱,字形怪异,元明时代没有人解读。自清代方成培以后,一百多年来中外学者相继考辨,成绩斐然。近人夏承焘权衡诸家之得失,考证更加严谨详核,并将其译为今工尺谱。音乐史家杨荫浏在乐律方面的考证尤称细密,更将其译为五线谱。至此这十七首词的乐谱已经完全破译。

Abstract 摘要
Haas (1942) wrote the first article entirely devoted to classifiers, in this case with reference to Thai, in a major linguistic journal. Since then the literature on the subject has increased substantially. Certain interesting aspects of classifiers, however, remain untreated, notably the evolution of this linguistic category in one particular language. Classifiers constitute the only grammatical category in the Chinese language whose emergence dates well after the beginning of recorded history. Since Chinese is rich in this category and sufficiently documented with written texts as ancient as the 14th century B.C., it is therefore well placed as an appropriate if not ideal language for tracing the evolution of a classifier system. In this article, I mainly deal with the genesis of this grammatical category in Chinese from a cognitive point of view. Based on evidence from Archaic Chinese, I argue that the emergence of this grammatical category was first motivated by a mnemonic necessity often manifested in language. It was these mnemonic devices that later evolved into what is now called classifiers. I limit my arguments to the Chinese case, but I strongly believe that the principle underlying my arguments will ultimately find echoes in some other classifier languages.

哈斯在一九四二年根据泰语为一份重要语言学学报撰写了第一篇量词专着。自后,有关量词文章在数量上和质量上都有显着的增加和提高。然而量词好些方面,特别是它的演化过程,仍待探讨。量词是汉语唯一的,产生于文献时期后的语法词类。汉语不单只富于量词,而且有较充分的,上推至公元前十四世纪的文献资料。因此,汉语若不是理想的,起码是追索量词演化的一个适当语言。本文主要从认知角度去探讨量词的起源。我根据上古汉语资料,提出量词的出现是源于语言上记忆需要这一说法。最早的量词,有称之回响量词,正体现这种语言上的记忆手段。我们的论证只限于汉语,但我深信这论证所据的原则终会在其它具有量词的语言里获得进一步的数据的支持。

Abstract 摘要
Interrogative sentences are not always used as actual requests for information. “Rhetorical interrogations” are interrogations that have assertive value; this displacement of modality is connected with an inversion of negation. In Chinese, this kind of construction, called fanwenju (FWJ) has two types of markers. Some markers are specific of the medium used, such as, in the spoken form, intonation patterns, or, in the written form, the use of specific adverbs (e.g. nandao “hard to say”). There are also syntactic markers, such as the position of the negation, whose function is more systematic than in European languages. I study three types of sequences. (1) In negative sentences, the adverbs jiu “thus, soon”, ye “also, even”, hai “still” usually precede the negation. The reverse is acceptable only if the sentence may be understood as FWJ. (2) In predicates including an auxiliary verb, the most usual place for the negation is before the auxiliary. The negation before the second verb usually denotes a FWJ. (3) Although the sequence “negation + dei (must)” is considered by most authors as ungrammatical, it is currently used with a FWJ meaning. In this paper I also discuss the most frequent uses of FWJ in the different types of interrogative sentences in Chinese, i.e. tezhi wenti “Question-word Question”, shifei wenti “Intonation/particle Question” and fanfu wenti “A-not-A Question”.

提问的句式不一定表示疑问。比如反问句并不是提出问题,而是用问句的形式强调肯定或否定的意义。反问句的形式和意义是相反的,如果是否定式,强调的是肯定的意思;如果是肯定式则反之。汉语中反问句有两种表达方式。有些和欧洲语言相似,即说话中运用语调的变化,而书写上则加上副词(例如,“难道”)。还有一些在结构上具有明显的反问标志。这些都与否定词的位置有关系。我在本文中也谈到在问句的不同种类,特指问句,是非问句和反复问句,中反问句常用形式的用法。

Abstract 摘要
The paper discusses the findings of an investigation on the manners in which the Mandarin numeral classifiers (NCL) are used in natural discourse. Five short stories written in Mandarin published in Taiwan are investigated. 14 native speakers of Chinese (all Cornell students) were consulted to help determine the discourse status of various topics. Significantly, 44% of the semantically referential-indefinite entities are found to be introduced into the discourse without NCL’s. Furthermore, 80% of the major discourse entities as determined both by our subjects’ judgment and our discourse persistence values (the number of occurrences within 10 clauses after the initial introduction) are introduced into the discourse with the NCL’s, while 2% of the minor entities at their initial occurrences are without NCL’s. Thus, the findings of the current study reveals that there appears to be a correlation between the use of NCL and the thematic status of the discourse entities. The overriding principle is thematic centrality.

本文讨论汉语数量词在话语中的功能。我们对五篇在台湾发表的短篇故事作了一个调查。此外,我们还请了十四位康奈尔大学的中国同学帮助我们决定各个名词性实体在故事中的作用。在统计上我们发现,44%在语意上非限定的有指实体在故事中第一次提到时都没有数量词。而且根据我们实验对象的判断和话语持续值(一个实体在故事中第一次提到后的十句中的重复次数)而定的主要实体中,80%在故事中第一次提到时都有数量词,而82%的次要实体在故事中第一次提到时均没有数量词。因此本文的调查结果表明,数量词的应用和话语中的名词性实体与故事主题有关。

Abstract 摘要
In the speech of Lanzhou dialect xia (下) has two different pronunciations: and. The former is known as “colloquial pronunciation”, the latter as “literary pronunciation”. When xia is used as causative verb, it is never pronounced as, but. In other situations the two pronunciations are both allowable. Most of the young people are likely to adopt the literary pronunciation, whereas the middle age and old people the colloquial pronunciation. By comparing with the pronunciations of xia in various places such as Xi’an, Hu county in Shanxi Province and Linxia county in Gansu, it is clear that the change of xia from to did not affect all the words at one time. The causative verb xia is the pioneer of this change. There is no transitional sound such as between and. This is just in accordance with the lexical diffusion sequence theory. It is suggested that one of the causes of the lexical diffusion sequence is due to both the grammatically special use of a word and its combinations with other words.

兰州方言中的“下”有两种读音,一种是,另一种是。“下”是中古匣母马韵开口二等字。很明显,这两种读音反映了“下”古今语音形式上的差别。前一读是较早时期的读音,后一读是晚期的读音。古今语言形式并存的现象在汉语方言中不乏其例。而且往往以文白异读的途径表现出来:白读用较早的语音形式,文读用晚起的语音形式。因此,研究兰州方言的文献,对“下”的两种读音也只以文白差异(前一读为白读,后一读为文读)一说而了之。说文白之差,当然是对的,但具体怎么个差法,还值得做进一步的观察和研究。例如,同样是口语常用单音词,“下山”,“山下” 的 “下” 有文白两读。而 “下蛋”, “下雨” 的 “下” 只有文读,没有白读,也就是说,只能念后一种读音,不念前一种读音。这是为什么?本文拟就兰州方言中“下 ”的用法和两种读音的关系做具体说明,并对形成这种关系的原因提出一些看法,以就教于学界同行。为了排印方便,下文对 “下” 的前一读称 “白读”,后一读称 “文读”,尽量少写音标。

Abstract 摘要
This paper discusses an attempt to write a computer program that would properly model the phonological development of Chinese from Middle Chinese to Modern Peking Mandarin, using the rules in Chen 1976. Several problems are encountered, the most significant being that the rules cannot apply in the same order for all lexical items. The significance of this in terms of the implementation of sound change is briefly discussed.

这篇文章是探讨陈渊泉教授的中古汉语到现代汉语的语音演变。在使用电脑模仿语音演变时所面临的各种问题。其中最主要的问题是这些规则不能按照同样的顺序适用于不同的词。本文同时提出了这些问题在理论上的意义。

Report 报告

New Publication 新书

Corrigenda 斟误

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on google
Google+
Share on twitter
Twitter
zh_HKZH-HK