遭受义被动句研究

论文摘要

“遭受义被动句”在以往研究中被称为“保留宾语句”、“间接被动句”或“领属被动句”。本文的遭受义被动句的特点为：从语义看，主语的所指被动地遭受了某种不好的事情；从结构看，有宾语留在被动动词之后，正是这个保留宾语和被动动词有直接的语义关系（普通被动句的表层主语是动词的宾语，它们有直接的语义关系）。大体而言，动词后名词和被动句的主语拥有部分与整体、亲属或领属关系。本文旨在乔姆斯基的《最简探索：框架》（Chomsky 1998）和《语段推导》（Chomsky 1999）的框架下研究汉语中“被”字的句法地位以及汉、日、英语中遭受义被动句的生成过程，从而为该句式的句法生成机制寻找一个统一的解释。在以往的相关研究中，“领主提升说”是有关保留宾语句法解释中最具影响的一种观点。我们的分析证明这种论点存在问题。我们认为：“被”属于三大核心功能语类之一的T并带有[+affected]特征，标之为Taff。文章还进一步提出了“双分T”假设：核心功能语类T分裂成事件结构Taff和时态Tten。汉语中的被动标记“被”、日语中的被动语素-（r）are以及英语中的get都属于Taff，它是语言中普遍存在的。Taff拥有一致性特征和EPP特征。根据乔姆斯基关于核心功能语类基本结构特征的原理，Taff的结构如下图，Taff是核心功能语类，XP是其EPP特征所选的额外的标志语，EA是外论元。α=[XP[（EA）TaffYP]]我们认为在汉语和其他语言中都存在遭受义被动句。本文根据乔姆斯基（1999）的“双一致假说”和本文的遭受者宾语假说、“双分T”假说以及关于“被”的句法地位的假设，为中、日、英语言中遭受义被动句的生成过程提供一个统一的解释。文章采用何晓炜（1999）的观点：名词词组在词汇矩阵中已获得论旨角色：Affectee、Theme和Agent（可选）；根据潘海华（1997）提出的合并顺序，动词先和Theme名词合并成V’，V’和Affectee名词合并为VP，VP再与v合并，如无agent名词，则成vP；如有agent名词，则成v’。英语中get被动句的生成稍有不同，因其有额外的由宾语提升的标志语XP，XP和v’合并为vP。此后，Tten与vP合并成TtenP，如果v有EA，那么Tten有一致性特征和EPP特征，EA移到[Spec，Tten’]位置以删除其不可解释性特征。最后TtenP与Taff合并，Taff有不可解释性一致性特征和EPP特征，Affectee名词移到[Spec，Taff’]位置以删除其不可解释性一致性特征和EPP特征，至此，所有不可解释性特征全部删除。

论文目录

• 摘要
• Abstract
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• 1.1 The Empirical Focus of the Study
• 1.2 Characteristics of the Affected Passive Construction
• 1.3 The Purpose of the Study
• 1.4 The Organization of the Thesis
• Chapter 2 Overview of Previous Studies
• 2.1 The Possessor Raising Analysis and the Problems
• 2.1.1 The Possessor Raising Analysis
• 2.1.2 Problems with the Possessor Raising Analysis:
• 2.1.2.1 The Dead Possessor Argument
• 2.1.2.2 The Dative Passive Argument
• 2.1.2.3 Left Branching Condition
• 2.2 Argument Augmentation Analysis
• 2.3 Ergativization Analysis
• 2.4 The Retained Object Nominative Case Analysis:
• 2.5 Possessor Externally Merged Analysis
• Chapter 3 Theoretical Framework
• 3.1 Lexical Selection
• 3.2 Phase and Derivation
• 3.3 Operations
• 3.4 Core Functional Categories （CFCs）
• 3.5 Checking Theory in MI
• Chapter 4 The Syntactic Status of Bei
• 4.1 Previous Studies within the Framework of Generative Grammar
• 4.1.1 Bei as a Preposition
• 4.1.2 Bei as a Matrix Verb
• 4.1.3 Bei as a Passive Morpheme
• 4.1.4 Bei as a Light Verb
• 4.1.5 Bei as the Combination of a Preposition and a Passive Marker
• 4.1.6 Bei as a Functional Category
• 4.1.6.1 Deng's Analysis
• 4.1.6.2 Tan's Analysis
• 4.2 The Meaning Change of Bei in History
• 4.3 A New Hypothesis: Bei as a Core Functional Category T with [+Affected] Feature
• 4.3.1 Functional Parameterization Hypothesis
• 4.3.2 Bei's [+ V] Feature
• 4.3.3 Bei: not as a v
• 4.3.4 T and its Syntactic Properties
• 4.3.5 The Selectional Property and Uninterpretable Features of T in English
• 4.3.6 T in Chinese
• 4.3.7 Bei as a Core Functional Category T with [+ affected] Feature
• Chapter 5 The Derivation of the Affected Passive Construction
• 5.1 VP shell Analysis Propounded by Radford
• 5.2 Our Proposal: Affectee Object—A Kind of Indirect Object
• 5.3 Huang's Outer Object Hypothesis
• 5.4 Pan's Maleficiary Role Insertion and Thematic Role Hierarchy
• 5.5 Chomsky's Double Agreement Hypothesis
• 5.6 Split T Hypothesis
• 5.7 The Derivation of the Affected Passive Construction in Chinese
• 5.7.1 The Derivation of the Passive Construction with Agent
• 5.7.2 The Derivation of the Passive Construction without Agent
• 5.8 The Affected Passive Construction in Japanese
• 5.8.1 The Classification of Japanese Passive Proposed by Matsushita
• 5.8.2 Teramura's 'Adversative Passive' Proposal
• 5.8.3 The Structure and Derivation of Japanese Passives Proposed by Gouro
• 5.8.4 The Derivation of the Japanese Affected Passive Construction
• 5.9 The Affected Passive Construction in English
• 5.9.1 Be-Passives and Get-Passives
• 5.9.2 Adversity or Benefit
• 5.9.3 Haegeman's Analysis: Get as a Full Lexical Verb
• 5.9.4 Get as a Light Verb
• 5.9.5 The Derivation of the English Affected Passive Construction
• 5.10 Summary
• Conclusion
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Acknowledgements
• 攻读学位期间主要的研究成果