師大學報
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/169
Browse
10 results
Search Results
Item 英語語句的「言外之意」(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1985-06-??) 湯廷池The present paper attempts to provide plausible explanations for English sen-tences which are cognitively synonymous yet superficially different. Altogether 25 movement transformations in English are discussed and their communicative functions explained on the basis of three principles: From Old to New Principle (a pragmatic principle)' From Light to Heavy Principle (a rhythmic principle), and From Low to High Principle (a syntactic principle). Finally, several pedagogically important gener-alizations have been made with regard to the nature and function of these principles.Item 國語語法與功用解釋(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1986-06-??) 湯廷池The present paper attempts to provide plausible explanations for Chinese sentences which are cognitively synonymous yet superficially different. Altogether 18 sentence struc-tures in Chinese along with their variant forms are discussed and their communicative functions explained on the basis of four principles: From Old to New Principle (a prag-matic principle), From Light to Heavy Principle (a rhythmic principle), From Low to High Principle (a syntactic principle), and Prom Close to Distant Principle (an empathy princi-ple). Furthermore, these same principles have been applied to the corresponding sentence structures in English to investigate whether similar sentence constructions in the two lan-guages perform similar communicative functions.Item 國語形容詞的重叠規律(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1982-06-??) 湯廷池It has been pointed out by Professors Charles N. Li and Sandra A. Thompson (Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar, p. 33) that not all adjectives in Chinese can undergo reduplication and that there does not appear to be any rule governing which adjectives can be reduplicated and which adjectives cannot. The present paper argues that, contrary to Li and Thompson's analysis, there are very general rules concerning reduplication of adjectives in Chinese. The reduplication of monosyllabic adjectives, for example, is mainly dependent on a semantic consideration as to whether adjectives express an objective assessment or an subjective evaluation. The reduplication of disyllabic adjectives, on the other hand, is constrained not only semantically but also morphologically (e.g. whether the adjective is a subject-predicate construction, a verb-object con-struction, a verb-complement construction, an endocentric construction or a coordinate construction, and whether the constituent morpheme is free or bound) as well as stylistically (e.g. whether the adjective is colloquial or literary in usage). In passing, the syntactic functions of Chinese adjectives in general and a distinction between the adjectival use and the adverbial use of reduplicated adjectives have also been discussed.Item 國語的雙賓結構(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1977-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語、英語、日語句法的對比研究(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1978-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語語法的主要論題(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1983-06-??) 湯廷池The present work is a critical review of Charles N. Li and Sandra A. Thompson's Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar as well as a synthetic survey of current issues in Chinese syntax, which include among other topics: (1) Is Chinese really an isolating language? (2) Is Chinese really a monosyllabic language? (3) Is Chinese a topic-prominent or a subject-prominent language? (4) Is Chinese an SOV or and SVO language; (5) What are the basic morphological structures and morphological rules in Chinese? (6) How can subject and topic be distinguished from each other? (7) How can the definiteness and the reference of a noun phrase be determined in Chinese? (8) What is the basic constituent structure of a noun phrase and pronominal modification in Chinese? It is hoped that the review will be a contribution to modern linguistic analysis in general and a better understanding of Chinese syntax in particular.Item 國語的關係子句(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1979-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語疑問句的研究(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1981-06-??) 湯廷池The present work is a detailed investigation and analysis of interrogative sentences in Chinese. Section 1, an introduction, specifies the objective and scope of the study. Section 2 discusses pragmatic functions of questioning in general and presents a detailed analysis of four types of Chinese questions: particle questions, disjunctive questions, V-not-V questions and interrogative-word questions. Special emphasis is laid on the discussion of concordance between the positive-negative polarities of answer particles and anwer sentences, coocourrence restrictions between in-terrogative particles and various types of questions, and syntactic changes involved in V-not-V questions. It is suggested that all types of questions may be reduced to, or derived from, disjunctive questions. Section 3 gives a detailed analysis of interrogative words in Chinese, their interrogative use and non-interrogative uses, which include the comprehensive use, the indefinite use, the correlative use, the exclamatory use, and the rhetorical question. It is found that the non-interrogative uses of interrogative words bear a close relationship with their interrogative counter-parts in pragmatic as well as semantic function. Section 4 then examines the syntactic behaviors and constraints of embedded questions. It is pointed out that in addition to the embedding of indirect questions, direct questions may also occur as the sentential object of the verbs of direct questions, assumption, and judgment. The pragmatic functions of these verbs, together with the scope of question involved, are discussed in some detail in contrast to other types of verbs. Finally in Section 5, a conclusion, the difference in interpretation of embedded questions is shown to be a natural consequence of the embedded direct and indirect questions, and the difference in the scope of questioning involved.Item 國語疑問句研究續論(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1984-06-??) 湯廷池The present study consists of two parts. The first part deals with Li and Thompson's (1979) semantic principle and pragmatic constraint on A-not-A ques-tsion in Chinese, and the second part with analyses of direct and indirect questions in Chinese proposed by Y. Mochizuki (1980), R.L. Cheng (1982), J. Chen (1982) and C. T. Huang (1982). Our study points out that Li and Thompson's semantic principle and pragmatic constraint are conspicuously lacking in generality as well as independent evidence and thus can be replaced by constraints which are more general and plausible. Our study also points out that such attempts as made by Mochizuki and Chen to determine the scope of question words in Chinese by means of subcategorization and/or semantic features of complement-taking verbs fall short of both descriptive adequacy and explanatory adequacy, and presents an alternative analysis to Huang's analysis by making crucial use of logical forms and the rule "Move α ".Item 國語分裂句、分裂變句、準分裂句的結構與限制之研究(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1980-06-??) 湯廷池The present work attempts to give a detailed investigation and analysis of two heretofore unexplored syntactic constructions in Chinese: cleft sentences and pseudo-cleft snetences. Folowing Section 1, an introductions, Section 2 discusses the communicative function of cleft and pseudocleft sentences in Chinese and makes a tentative distinction between them. Se-ction 3 investigates the syntactic as well as semantic func-tion of the copula shr in various types of Chinese sentences sentences and concludes that shr serves as 'assertive verb'in all these sentence-types. Section 4 then examines the meani-ng and function of the particle de in various syntactic con-structions in Chinese. Several pieces of evidence are given to show that the de occurring in a cleft construction functions as a subordinate marker, while the de appearing in a pseudo-cleft construction serves as a final particle. It is also claimed that pseudo-cleft sentence dderive from underlying structures containing a relative clause by deleting the antecedent ren (person), dungsyi (thing), or shrjing (matter ). Cleft sentences, on the other hand, may derive from under-lying structures in which the higher predicate shr is low-ered into the position immediately before the focused element in the embedded sentence, or, alternatively, from underlying structures in which the focused element is raised out of the sentential subject into the dummy node in the matrix equation sentence. Scetion 5 is devoted to the discussion of how a cleft sentence, its stylistic variant, and a pseudo-cleft sen-tentence are related in their syntactic structure and communi-cative function, and thus may result in structural ambiguity Finally, Section 6 deals with various constraints on clefting and pseudo-clefting in Chinese, exploring in passing the basic constituent structures of Chinese. It is suggested that these constraints may best be treated as constraints on surface structures rather than constraints on deep structure or tra-nsf