中文雙賓結構及與格結構的研究

Abstract

本研究旨在探討漢語中的雙賓結構和與格結構。為了解決雙賓語的生成和格位的問題，本文反對Larson(1988)、顧陽(2000)、周長銀(2002)採用「被動化」來分析雙賓結構及與格結構的轉換，本文採用了Harley(2003)觀點，認為雙賓結構和與格結構中含有PHave和PLoc，進而與Cause結合，但漢語與英語參數不同，造成語言差異。本文設計漢語雙賓結構和與格結構的判別機制為：在雙賓結構中，語意取決在於P＋/－Have，與Cause結合產生有語音或無語音的「給」。而與格結構，本文則是設計P＋/－Loc來闡述語意。因此，漢語「給予類」雙賓結構表達的基本語意是「主語使間接賓語擁有直接賓語」，漢語「索取類」雙賓結構語意是「主語使間接賓語失去直接賓語」。這樣雙賓句和與格結構的問題可以得到統一的解釋。我們提出這兩種句型的分析。本文反對這兩種句式在句法上的衍生關係。 然而，關於「給」字句的句法功能，我們對李艷惠(1990)、黃居仁(1999)及劉永華(2003)的觀點提出質疑，本文提出分析「給」字句中，無論是在直接賓語後或是核心動詞後的「給」，都是可以統一看作介詞。

This thesis deals with the double object construction and the dative construction in Chinese. Larson(1988), Gu(2000) and Zhou(2002) argue that dative constructions must be under a process similar to passivization. We disagree with their point. We follow Harley(2003) , decomposing the verb give in two ways. This paper argues that there is no transformational between the double object construction and the dative construction. The double object construction is characterized by the decomposition Cause + Have. The dative construction contains Cause + Loc. We propose a new model, which is similar to Harley’s. Our model departs from Harley’s mainly in that ＋/－Have is used instead of ＋Have. And ＋/－Loc is used instead of ＋Loc. English has only ＋Have and ＋Loc. But Chinese has ＋/－Have and ＋/－Loc. The semantic of double object sentence is decomposed as [ X (subject) causes Y (indirect object) to ＋/－have Z(direct object)]. Finally, we analyze the part of speech of gei . There are several reasons to explain why gei construction in the post-verbal and post-DO positions as a preposition is superior to a verbal analysis of gei.Our analysis is contrary to Li(1990) , Huang(1999) and Liu(2003).