標題: 不帶「比」字比較句
Comparatives without Bi
作者: 蘇琬淇
Su, Wan-Chi
劉辰生
Liu, Chen-Sheng
外國語文學系外國文學與語言學碩士班
關鍵字: 比較項;變量;度量詞;比較詞素;the standard of comparison;the differential;the measure phrase;the comparative morpheme
公開日期: 2010
摘要: 之前有許多關於形容詞當謂語的不帶「比」字比較句研究,然而,幾乎沒有研究探討動詞性的不帶「比」字比較句。此篇論文主要探討中文 X Duo V (Y) D 和台語X Ke V/A (Y) D這兩種不帶「比」字比較句的句法結構。這兩種比較句和中文形容詞當謂語的X A (Y) D比較句結構 (Liu, 2007) 有相似的特徵,例如,他們後面都帶有兩個名詞性補語:一個是當作比較項的指示名詞組,另一個是作為變量的度量詞組或名詞組。此外,比較項可省略,但變量卻必須存在。 儘管如此,過去的研究,包括C.C. Chao (2005) 和 M. Xiang (2005),並沒有解釋為何比較項可省略,而變量卻必須保留的原因。C. S. Liu (2007) 認為在X A (Y) D的比較句中,形容詞經過移位並和隱形的弱性比較詞素結合 (也就是隱形的動詞性詞綴「過2」)。因為「過2」的語意內涵已被消除,這個隱形的比較詞素喪失核准形容詞間距論元的能力,所以必須藉由變量來限制形容詞的間距論元。 本文認為中文的「多」和台語的「ke」皆為動詞,「多」和「ke」出現會多帶個補語,也就是所謂的比較項,而且因為不同於動詞性詞綴「過2」,「多」和「ke」是組成比較句的語意核心。所以,在「多」和「ke」後面出現的形容詞或動詞,在結構上沒有往上移位並與「多」和「ke」合併的動機。若「多」和「ke」移位,會造成詞序上和主語選擇上的問題。根據Larson (1988) 的VP 外殼 (VP-shell) 和 C. T. Huang (2006) 的 V-得結構 (V-de construction),本文認為中文的「多」和台語的「ke」為主要動詞,表達「超越╱超過」的語意;至於在「多」和「ke」後面的動詞或形容詞則是表達主要事件形成的方法。在「多」和「ke」後面的動詞或形容詞,會先在辭彙階段裡,與「多」和「ke」合併成一個詞,然後這個詞再移位到輕動詞EXCEED的位置檢核語意特徵,進而形成比較句。像非受格動詞「來」一樣,「多」和「ke」也可當非受格動詞,帶個可省略的方位詞和不可省略的度量詞當補語。所以,本文將比較項類比為方位詞,在句法上可省略;度量詞在非受格句中必須出現,所以在不帶「比」字比較句中擔任變量角色時,也必須保留。台語的「ke」也可以被刪略而形成X A Y D結構的比較句,並且比較項和變量都必須出現。本文根據T. H. Lin (2001) 的輕動詞理論 (light verb theory),把此結構視為古漢語的殘留,形容詞與輕動詞EXCEED在結構上合併成動詞。此外,有些比較句帶有蒙受語意,本文認為這些蒙受語意,來自於「多」和「ke」後面動詞本身的詞彙語意影響,與比較句結構本身無關。
The adjectival comparative without bi has been studied for several years. However, seldom papers discuss about the verbal comparative without bi. This thesis is about the syntactic structures of the X Duo V (Y) D comparative in Mandarin and the X Ke V/A (Y) D comparative in Taiwanese. These two types of comparatives without bi have similar properties with the X A (Y) D comparative in Mandarin (Liu, 2007). More specifically, there are two nominal complements contained in comparatives without bi: a referential NP functioning as the standard of comparison and a MP/DP functioning as the differential. Furthermore, the standard of comparison is optional, but the differential is obligatorily required. However, previous studies, including C.C. Chao (2005) and M. Xiang (2005), don’t explain why the standard is optional and the differential is obligatory. C. S. Liu (2007) claims that the adjective has been moved and incorporated into a covert weak comparative morpheme (i.e. the covert verbal suffix -guo2). Since the semantic content of -guo2 is bleached, the covert comparative morpheme lost the ability to license the interval argument of the adjective. Thus, the differential is necessary to restrict the interval argument of the adjective. In this thesis, I proposed that the morpheme duo “exceed” and ke “exceed” are verbs, unlike a verbal suffix like guo2, because they are the semantic nucleus to form the comparatives. Therefore, the verb or the adjective behind duo/ke has no motivation to raise and to merge with duo/ke. The movement may cause problems about word ordering and arguments selecting. Based on Larson’s (1988) VP-shell and C. T. Huang’s (2006) V-de construction, I consider the comparative morpheme duo “exceed” in Mandarin and ke “exceed” in Taiwanese to be the main verb expressing the surpassing meaning, and the verb/adjective behind duo/ke is a manner of the main event. The verb/adjective behind duo/ke merges with duo/ke in the lexicon to be a word first, and then they are moved to a light verb EXCEED for feature checking to form the comparative construction. Like the unaccusative verb lai “come”, the verb duo/ke can take an optional location and an obligatory MP as its complements. Therefore, I argue that the standard of comparison is an extended location, so it is optional. The MP is obligatory in the unaccusative construction, and it is also necessary when functioning as the differential the comparative construction without bi. Moreover, Taiwanese ke may be deleted to form an X A Y D comparative construction, and both of the standard and the differential is obligatory. Base on T. H. Lin’s (2001) light verb theory, the structure may be a residue of different stratum of Archaic Chinese. The adjective is incorporated to a light verb EXCEED. Besides, the affective reading might be allowed in the verbal comparative is owing to the lexical meaning of the verb behind the comparative morpheme.
URI: http://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079745517
http://hdl.handle.net/11536/45743
Appears in Collections:Thesis


Files in This Item:

  1. 551701.pdf