汉语关系从句加工综述

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2019.06.004

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 汉语关系从句同时具备SVO语序和中心词后置特点,是句子加工研究关注的焦点之一。近年汉语关系从句加工研究发展迅猛,但在汉语主语和宾语关系从句的加工优势问题上却一直存在争议。本文介绍汉语关系从句加工的研究现状,重点总结了不同的句子加工理论对汉语主语和宾语关系从句加工难度的预测,梳理了相关实证考察的结果和主要争议。对相关理论及实证研究的分析和总结表明,汉语主语和宾语关系从句的加工受量名不匹配构式、“被”和指量词使用、生命性效应、语境等多种因素综合影响。本文评述了现有研究的不足,并从加工理论发展、汉语语言分析、影响因素分析、研究方法更新等几个方面出发,为下一步加强汉语关系从句加工研究提出了建议。

关键词: 汉语关系从句, 句子加工, 加工优势, 语言发展

中图分类号:

杨梅, 严晓朦. 汉语关系从句加工综述[J]. 当代外语研究, 2019, 19(06): 43-53.

YANG Mei, YAN Xiaomeng. An Overview of Chinese Relative Clause Processing Research[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2019, 19(06): 43-53.

参考文献

Chen, B., A. Ning, H. Bi & S. Dunlap. 2008. Chinese subject-relative clauses are more difficult to process than the object-relative clauses [J]. Acta Psychologica 129(1): 61-65.
Gibson, E. 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies [J]. Cognition 68(1): 1-76.
Gibson, E. 2000. The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity [A]. In A. Marantz, Y. Miyashita & W. O’Neil (eds.). Image, Language, Brain [C]. Cambridge: MIT Press. 95-126.
Gibson, E. & H. -H. I. Wu.2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context [J]. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(1-2): 125-155.
Hawkins, J. A.1994. A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
Hawkins, J. A. 2004. Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hawkins, J. A. 2014. Cross-Linguistic Variation and Efficiency [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
He, W. & B. Chen. 2013. The role of animacy in Chinese relative clause processing [J]. Acta Psychologica 144(1): 145-153.
He, W., N. Xu & R. Ji. 2017. Effects of age and location in Chinese relative clauses processing [J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 46(5): 1067-1086.
Hsiao, F. 2003. The Syntax and Processing of Relative Clauses in Mandarin Chinese [D]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Hsiao, F. & E. Gibson. 2003. Processing relative clauses in Chinese [J]. Cognition 90(1): 3-27.
Hsu, C.-C. N. 2006. Issues in Head-final Relative Clauses in Chinese——Derivation, Processing and Acquisition [D]. University of Delaware.
Hsu, C.-C. N., C. Phillips & M. Yoshida. 2005. Cues for head-final relative clauses in Chinese [A]. In 18th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing [C]. Tucson: AZ.
Jäger, L., Z. Chen, Q. Li, C.-J.C. Lin & S. Vasishth. 2015. The subject-relative advantage in Chinese: Evidence for expectation-based processing [J]. Journal of Memory and Language (79-80): 97-120.
Keenan, E. L. & B. Comrie. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar [J]. Linguistic Inquiry 8(1): 63-99.
Kuo, K. & S. Vasishth. 2006. Processing relative clauses: Evidence from Chinese [J]. Unpublished Manuscript, University of Potsdam.
Li, Q., X. Guo, Y. Yao & N. Müller. 2016. Relative clause preference in learners of Chinese as a second language [J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 39(2): 199-214.
Lin, C.-J. C. & T. G. Bever. 2006. Subject preference in the processing of relative clauses in Chinese [A]. In D. Baumer, D. Montero & M. Scanlon (eds.). Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics [C]. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. 254-260.
Lin, Y. & S. M. Garnsey. 2010. Animacy and the resolution of temporary ambiguity in relative clause comprehension in Mandarin [A]. In H. Yamashita, Y. Hirose & J. Packard (eds.). Processing and Producing Head-final Structures(Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics) [C]. London / New York : Springer. 241-276.
MacDonald, M. C. & M. H. Christiansen. 2002. Reassessing working memory: Comment on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996) [J]. Psychological Review 109(1): 35-54.
MacWhinney, B. & C. Pléh. 1988. The processing of restrictive relative clauses in Hungarian [J]. Cognition 29(2): 95-141.
O’Grady, W. 1997. Syntactic Development [M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
O’Grady, W. 2015. Processing determinism [J]. Language Learning 65(1): 6-32.
Packard, J. L., Z. Ye & X. Zhou. 2010. Filler-gap processing in Mandarin relative clauses: Evidence from event-related potentials [A]. In H. Yamashita, Y. Hirose & J. Packard (eds.). Processing and Producing Head-Final Structures (Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics) [C]. The Netherlands: Springer. 219-240.
Qiao, X., L. Shen & K. Forster. 2012. Relative clause processing in Mandarin: Evidence from the maze task [J]. Language and Cognitive Processes 27(4): 611-630.
Sun, X., R. Hancock, T. G. Bever, X. Cheng, L. Schmidt & U. Seifert. 2016. Processing relative clauses in Chinese: Evidence from event-related potentials [J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 39(1): 92-114.
Vasishth, S., Z. Chen, Q. Li & G. Guo. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses: Evidence for the universal subject preference [J]. PLoS One 8(10): 1-14.
Wu, F. 2009. Factors affecting relative clause processing in Mandarin [D]. University of Southern California.
Wu, F., T. Haskell & E. Andersen. 2006. The interaction of lexical, syntactic, and discourse factors in on-line Chinese parsing: Evidence from eye-tracking [A]. In the 19th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing [C]. New York: CUNY Graduate Center.
Wu, F., E. Kaiser & E. Andersen. 2010. Subject preference, head animacy, and lexical cues: A corpus study of relative clauses in Chinese [A]. In H. Yamashita, Y. Hirose & J. Packard (eds.). Processing and Producing Head-final Structures [C]. The Netherlands: Springer. 173-194.
Wu, F., E. Kaiser & E. Andersen. 2012. Animacy effects in Chinese relative clause processing [J]. Language and Cognitive Processes 27(10): 1489-1524.
Wu, F., Y. Luo & X. Zhou. 2014. Building Chinese relative clause structures with lexical and syntactic cues: Evidence from visual world eye-tracking and reading times [J]. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience 29(10): 1205-1226.
Xu, Y. 2014. Processing relative clauses in Chinese as a second language [J]. Second Language Research 30(4): 439-461.
陈宝国、宁爱华. 2008. 汉语主语和宾语关系从句加工难度的比较[J]. 应用心理学 (1): 29-34.
何文广、陈宝国. 2016. 汉语主、宾关系从句加工难度及其核心名词生命性效应[J]. 心理科学 (1): 43-49.
蒋楠、范莉、乔晓妹、张辉、杨枫、吴诗玉. 2016. 第二语言加工:学科内容、研究方法及与二语习得的关系[J]. 当代外语研究 (6): 1-8.
李金满. 2013. 二语视角下汉语关系从句中的量词分布考察[J]. 现代外语 (2): 166-173.
李金满、吴芙芸. 2013. 类型学概括与二语学习者汉语关系从句产出研究[J]. 外语教学与研究 (1): 80-92.
李霄翔、季月. 2014. 句子加工的ERP研究: 理论与研究进展[J]. 中国外语 (5): 25-32.
刘涛、周统权、杨亦鸣. 2011. 主语关系从句加工优势的普遍性——来自汉语关系从句ERP研究的证据[J]. 语言科学 (1): 1-20.
刘月华. 2001. 实用现代汉语语法[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
吕叔湘. 1980. 现代汉语八百词[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆.
盛亚南、吴芙芸. 2013. 指量结构与汉语关系从句共现时的不对称分布及其原因——一项基于真实口语语料库的研究[J]. 现代外语 (2): 150-157.
唐正大. 2007. 关系化对象与关系从句的位置——基于真实语料和类型分析[J]. 当代语言学(2): 139-150.
王慧莉、邴文铎. 2013. 汉语关系从句使用频率与加工难度的非一致性——来自ERP的证据[J]. 外语研究(3): 13-22.
吴芙芸. 2011a. 基于经验还是基于工作记忆?——来自汉语新闻语料库中关系从句生命度格局的证据[J]. 语言科学 (4): 396-408.
吴芙芸. 2011b. 试论量名不匹配构式在语料库中的低频出现率及内在原因[J]. 现代外语 (2): 135-142.
吴芙芸. 2013. 增加的中心词会增大加工难度吗?——来自汉语的证据[J]. 外国语 (3): 60-67.
吴芙芸、吕骏. 2016. 汉语关系从句与指量词的位序:二语产出视角[J]. 汉语学习 (4): 84-94.
吴芙芸、盛亚南. 2016. 试论语境条件下限定词的必要性——再谈主语关系从句的加工优势[J]. 外国语 (2): 11-20.
张强、江火. 2010. 关系从句加工优势及局部句法复杂性解释——以汉语主宾语位置的关系从句加工为例[J]. 外语研究(6): 19-26.
张强、杨亦鸣. 2010. 汉语宾语关系从句加工优势——来自神经电生理学研究的证据[J]. 语言科学 (4): 337-353.
周统权、郑伟、舒华、杨亦鸣. 2010. 汉语宾语关系从句加工优势论——来自失语症研究的证据[J]. 语言科学 (3): 225-243.

[1]	朱永生;. 试论儿童进入成人语言阶段的判断标准[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(07): 4-7+76.
[2]	李金满;. 汉语二语关系从句产出研究——类型学视角[J]. 当代外语研究, 2015, 15(02): 34-39+78.
[3]	龚嵘;. 大学英语写作中常用词超用现象矫正训练程序的有效性论证[J]. 当代外语研究, 2012, 12(01): 32-36+57+63.