漢語詞組與子句比較句之研究

Abstract

以往漢語比較句的研究著重於帶‘比’字比較句型並探討其衍生方式，本文則另增不帶‘比’字比較句型（即本文所謂的「類雙賓式比較句」）的討論。由於「類雙賓式比較句」其句法語意特色與某些帶‘比’字比較句相近，本文提議帶‘比’字比較句應區分出「詞組比較句」與「子句比較句」兩種。因此，除了探究「類雙賓式比較句」其句法與語意現象之外，本文分別發展兩種衍生分析以適用於「詞組比較句」與「子句比較句」。 本研究採用「管轄約束理論」架構，其中「類雙賓式比較句」的句法分析則與Kennedy & McNally (2005)有關程度謂語形容詞蘊含比較語意的研究相呼應。此外，本文提議帶‘比’字比較句其衍生方式如下（一）「詞組比較句」分析認為「詞組比較句」是由「類雙賓式比較句」經過類似英語雙賓結構句之間句法移位過程衍生而來(Larson 1988b)；其中，「詞組比較句」中的比較詞組(‘比’-NP)則是透過類似「論元降格」運作體現而來。此看法有別於多數研究認為漢語比較句皆適用於「子句比較句」刪略分析，本文因此論證漢語需要區分詞組與子句比較句並且無法以相同的衍生方式分析之。（二）「子句比較句」分析認為「子句比較句」是由比較子句(‘比’-CP)此附加語子句以「後循環式加接」方式而加接至主要結構(Lebeaux 1988; Ishii 1997)，並且在語音形式層面進行刪除運作衍生而來。最後，本文分析在實證方面可推論出上述三種比較句與比較語意（例如「比較標準」與「程度差距值」）之間的互動關係。

Previous studies on Chinese comparatives mainly focus on structures with the comparative marker bi (bi-comparatives) and their derivations. This study explores in details other structures without a comparative marker, termed herein as comparatives with a double-object-like construction (DOC-comparatives). Based on the syntactic and semantic characteristics found in DOC-comparatives and certain bi-comparatives as well, our results indicate that phrasal comparatives and clausal comparatives exist in bi-comparatives. Correspondingly, in addition to investigating the syntactic and semantic phenomenon of DOC-comparatives, this study develops two derivative types in bi-comparatives, which are applicable to phrasal comparatives and clausal comparatives, respectively. Following the government-binding theoretical framework, we propose a structural analysis is performed for DOC-comparatives, which is in line with the semantic study of Kennedy and McNally (2005) on gradable predicates. Moreover, according to our analysis, Chinese bi-comparatives are derived as follows: (A) In the phrasal comparative analysis, phrasal comparatives are derived from DOC-comparatives via the syntactic movement, similar to Larson’s (1988b) analysis of English double object construction. The bi-phrase of phrasal comparatives is derived by the Argument Demotion; hence, such an analysis differs from the conventionally adopted clausal comparative analysis in which all bi-comparatives can be derived by an ellipsis. We then argue that phrasal comparatives and clausal comparatives should be distinguished from one another and cannot be derived in the same process. (B) In the clausal comparative analysis, clausal comparatives are derived by bi-clauses that are post-cyclically adjoined to the main clause (Lebeaux 1988; Ishii 1997) and subsequently undergo PF-deletion operation. Finally, empirical implications based on our analysis results are made regarding the interaction of comparatives discussed herein, along with a discussion of relevant comparison meanings such as standard of comparison and differential values.