论生成语法的句法象似性

论文摘要

近年来,一些功能语言学家开始重视研究语言结构与概念结构之间的关系,提出语言结构在很大程度上是非任意的,有理据的。语言结构与概念结构之间存在的理据性通常被称为语言的象似性。象似性的提出似乎对强调语法结构“自足性”和“独立性”的生成语法理论提出了挑战。然而,初步的研究表明,象似性与生成语法理论并非矛盾,相反,语法结构与概念结构之间的象似关系在生成语法理论中可以得到相当程度的阐释（Newmeyer,1992;韩景泉,2000; Lofti, 2001）。本论文旨在从象似性的角度研究生成语法理论中的诸多句法规则系统,探讨生成语法理论与象似性的一致性。首先,论文从形式主义与功能主义入手,介绍了两个语言学流派的哲学基础,对语言语法的承诺以及主要分支,勾勒了生成语法与象似性赖以生存的哲学及语言学背景,阐述了象似性的定义、缘起和分类,区分并梳理了象似性与任意性、理据性、经济性之间的关系。其次,论文从象似性的视角考察了原则与参数框架下从管约论到最简方案中的诸多句法规则。考察范围包括从宏观的X-阶标理论、格理论、D-结构、S-结构、逻辑式到微观的限定词组假设、并列结构、双宾语结构、结果结构与最简方案在内的十个方面。考察结果表明,生成语法理论中的X-阶标理论、格理论、D-结构、S-结构、逻辑式都可以从象似性的角度得到比较充分的解释,分别以其各自独特方式表现了距离象似、范畴象似、非对称象似、独立象似等象似性关系;同时,限定词组假设,并列结构,双宾语结构,结果结构与最简方案亦不排除从象似性角度解释的可能性,分别可以从线性象似,对称象似,距离象似等角度得以阐释。因此,生成语法理论与象似性在很大程度上是互容的。最后,论文探讨了象似性在语言进化过程中的作用。论文认为,作为语言历时进

论文目录

• Abstract
• 摘 要
• 1 Introduction
• 1.1 Research origin, purposes and questions
• 1.2 Research methodology
• 1.3 Research significance
• 1.4 Thesis arrangement
• 2 Different Approaches to Language and Grammar
• 2.1 The formalist approach
• 2.1.1 Philosophical foundations
• 2.1.2 Commitments to language and grammar
• 2.1.3 Varieties of the formalist approach
• 2.2 The functionalist approach
• 2.2.1 Philosophical foundations
• 2.2.2 Commitments to language and grammar
• 2.2.3 Varieties of the functionalist approach
• 2.3 Compatibility of the two approaches
• 3 Iconicity in Language and Grammar
• 3.1 Defining iconicity
• 3.1.1 Peirce’s icon-index-symbol trichotomy
• 3.1.2 Iconicity and arbitrariness
• 3.1.3 Iconicity, motivation and economy
• 3.1.4 Iconicity in the present dissertation
• 3.2 Iconicity: a property of language
• 3.2.1 Cognitive foundations
• 3.2.2 Pioneers in the study of linguistic iconicity
• 3.3 Types of iconicity
• 3.3.1 Iconicity of distance
• 3.3.2 Iconicity of linearity （Sequential order）
• 3.3.3 Iconicity of symmetry
• 3.3.4 Iconicity of asymmetry
• 3.3.5 Iconicity of quantity
• 3.3.6 Iconicity of categorization
• 3.4 Studies of iconicity within generative grammar
• 4 Generative Grammar: An Iconic Perspective （I）
• 4.1 X-bar theory and distance iconicity
• 4.1.1 X-bar theory
• 4.1.2 N-Bar: Adjuncts, Complements and distance iconicity
• 4.1.3 V-Bar: Complements and distance iconicity
• 4.2 Theta theory and distance iconicity
• 4.2.1 Theta theory and thematic Proto-Roles
• 4.2.2 Proto-Roles and Object/Oblique alternation
• 4.2.3 Thematic variation and distance iconicity
• 4.3 D-Structure, iconicity of categorization and distance
• 4.3.1 D-Structure
• 4.3.2 Iconicity in D-Structure
• 4.4 S-Structure, c-command and iconicity
• 4.4.1 S-Structure
• 4.4.2 C-command and asymmetric iconicity
• 4.5 Logical Form and iconicity
• 4.5.1 Logical Form
• 4.5.2 Iconicity in logical Form
• 5 Generative Grammar: An Iconic Perspective （II）
• 5.1 DP hypothesis, NP internal order and linear iconicity
• 5.1.1 DP Hypothesis
• 5.1.2 Referential Precedence, linearity and NP internal word order
• 5.2 Coordination and symmetric iconicity
• 5.2.1 Coordinate constructions
• 5.2.2 Constraints on Coordinate Constructions
• 5.2.3 VP-internal subject hypothesis and coordination
• 5.2.4 Linear Correspondence Axiom and coordination
• 5.2.5 Iconicity in coordination
• 5.3 Double-object constructions and iconicity
• 5.3.1 Larson’s approach
• 5.3.2 A Minimalist Approach
• 5.3.3 Iconic approaches
• 5.3.4 Compatibility of the different approaches
• 5.4 Resultatives and temporal iconicity
• 5.4.1 Resultative constructions
• 5.4.2 Syntactic constructions of resultatives: The ternary analysis
• 5.4.3 VP-Shell and Minimalist Program
• 5.4.4 Temporal iconicity in resultatives
• 5.5 Minimalist Program and iconicity
• 5.5.1 The Minimalist Program
• 5.5.2 A Unitarianist Theory of Semantico-Phonetic Form
• 6 Conclusion
• 6.1 Two approaches revisited—convergences and divergences
• 6.2 Iconicity—a motivating power of language evolution
• 6.3 Major findings of the present research
• 6.4 Limitations of the present research and suggestions for further study
• References