区域类型特色壮语双宾论元交替句式的产出分布

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2020.06.007

当代外语研究 ›› 2020, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (6): 59-67.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-8921.2020.06.007

区域类型特色壮语双宾论元交替句式的产出分布

向课书(), 吴芙芸()

上海交通大学,上海,200240

出版日期:2020-11-28 发布日期:2021-10-13
作者简介:向课书,上海交通大学博士生。主要研究方向为二语习得与加工、心理语言学。电子邮箱: xiangkeshu@163.com;|吴芙芸,上海交通大学外国语学院教授。主要研究方向为心理语言学。电子邮箱: fywu@sjtu.edu.cn

The Distribution of the Double Object Argument Alternations with Unique Areal Typology in Zhuang

XIANG Keshu(), Fuyun()

Online:2020-11-28 Published:2021-10-13

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

类型学研究显示,同一语言较少同时使用双宾结构和倒置双宾结构。但在中国部分南方方言和少数民族语言中,二者广泛出现。针对这两种可替换结构,现有研究多集中于结构特征分析,然而其使用频率和语法可接受度到底如何,鲜有精确量化。本文以壮语为考察对象,采用图片诱导句子产出及语法可接受度判断,对这两种结构予以量化实验考察。结果显示:在产出频率上,倒置双宾结构显著高于双宾结构;在句子可接受度上,两种结构无显著差异。研究结果说明壮语中的倒置双宾是基本结构,使用更广,符合区域类型学特征。

关键词: 壮语, 双宾结构, 倒置双宾结构, 使用频率, 图片诱导

Abstract:

Typologically it is rarely found in a language both double object (DO) and shifted double object (SDO). However, DO/SDO alternations seem prevalent in Chinese Southern dialects and in south-China ethnic languages. Previous studies have mainly focused on structural analyses of these two alternative structures, with little work on precise quantification regarding their usage frequencies and grammatical acceptability. Using a picture-elicitation task and a grammaticality judgment task, we aimed to verify the frequency of use of the DO/SDO alternations in Zhuang. Our results showed that in terms of production rate, significantly more SDO utterances were produced than DO utterances, whereas in terms of grammaticality rating, no significant difference was found between DO and SDO. We conclude that SDO as a basic structure is more prevalent in Zhuang, which is a hallmark of areal typology.

中图分类号:

H2118

向课书, 吴芙芸. 区域类型特色壮语双宾论元交替句式的产出分布[J]. 当代外语研究, 2020, 20(6): 59-67.

XIANG Keshu, Fuyun. The Distribution of the Double Object Argument Alternations with Unique Areal Typology in Zhuang[J]. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 2020, 20(6): 59-67.

图/表 3

参考文献 30

[1]	Cai Z. 2010. The Mental Representation and Processing of Syntactic Structure: Evidence from Chinese[D]. Doctoral dissertation of the University of Edinburgh.
[2]	Cai Z., P. Martin, H. Yan & B. Holly. 2011. Lexical and syntactic representations in closely related languages: Evidence from Cantonese-Mandarin bilinguals[J]. Journal of Memory and Language 65: 431-445.
[3]	Cai Z., P. Martin & B. Holly. 2012. Mapping concepts to syntax: Evidence from structural priming in Mandarin Chinese[J]. Journal of Memory and Language 66: 833-849.
[4]	Cai Z., P. Martin, R.Wang & B. Holly. 2015. It is there whether you hear it or not: Syntactic representation of missing arguments[J]. Cognition 136: 255-267.
[5]	Chin A. 2010. Two types of indirect object marker in Chinese: Their typological significance and development[J]. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 38: 1-25.
[6]	Croft W. 1990. Typology and Universals[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[7]	Huang J., P. Martin, J. Yang, S. Wang & B. Holly. 2016. The independence of syntactic processing in Mandarin: Evidence from structural priming[J]. Journal of Memory and Language 91:81-98.
[8]	Hashimoto M. 1976. Language diffusion on the Asian continent: Problems of typological diversity in Sino-Tibetan[J]. Computational Analyses of Asian and African Languages 3: 49-65.
[9]	Heine, B. & C. Konig. 2010. On the linear order of ditransitive objects[J]. Language Science 32: 87-131.
[10]	Kempen, G. & K. Harbusch. 2005. When grammaticality judgments allow more word order freedom than speaking and writing [A]. In M. Reis & S. Kepser (eds.). Linguistic Evidence-Empirical, Theoretical, and Computational Perspectives[C]. Berlin: Mouton. 327-347.
[11]	Xu, L. & A.Peyraube. 1997. On the double object construction and the oblique construction in Cantonese[J]. Studies in Language 1: 105-127.
[12]	Yue-Hashimoto A. 1993. Comparative Chinese Dialectal Grammar[M]. Paris: Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales.
[13]	戴由武、戴汉辉. 1994. 电白方言志[M]. 广州: 中山大学出版社.
[14]	邓思颖. 2003. 汉语方言语法的参数理论[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社.
[15]	何慎怡. 1994. 汉英双宾语句比较[J]. 古汉语研究(增刊):42-49.
[16]	何秋锡. 2016. 天等壮语双及物结构研究[D]. 桂林: 广西师范大学.
[17]	胡海琼. 2008. “给予义动词+直接宾语+间接宾语”句式在现代汉语方言中的分布及其历史来源[J]. 广东技术师范学院学报(4):29-32.
[18]	李桂兰. 2016. 壮侗语和汉语东南方言特殊语法构式研究[D]. 南宁: 广西民族大学.
[19]	李敬忠. 1994. 语言演变论[M]. 广州: 广州出版社.
[20]	李新魁、黄家教、施其生、麦耘、陈定方. 1995. 广州方言研究[M]. 广州: 广东人民出版.
[21]	林素娥. 2008. 汉语南方方言倒置双宾结构初探[J]. 语言科学(3): 308-319.
[22]	刘丹青. 2000. 粤语句法的类型学特点[J]. 亚太语文教育学报(2):1-30.
[23]	刘丹青. 2001. 汉语给予类双及物结构的类型学考察[J]. 中国语文(5):387-398.
[24]	毛宗武、蒙朝吉、郑宗泽. 1982. 瑶族语言简志[M]. 北京: 民族出版社.
[25]	钱乃荣. 1992. 当代吴语研究[M]. 上海: 上海教育出版社.
[26]	施维. 2014. 藏缅语给予类双及物结构类型比较研究[D]. 上海: 上海师范大学.
[27]	许雁. 2014. 壮语给予类双及物结构的类型学考察[J]. 广西民族师范学院学报(2):91-95.
[28]	袁家骅. 1983. 汉语方言概要(第二版)[M]. 北京: 语文出版社.
[29]	应雨田. 1994. 湖南安乡方言[M]. 北京: 中国社会科学出版社.
[30]	张敏. 2011. 汉语方言双及物结构南北差异的成因:类型学研究引发的新问题[J]. 中国语言学集刊(2):87-270.

区域类型特色壮语双宾论元交替句式的产出分布

The Distribution of the Double Object Argument Alternations with Unique Areal Typology in Zhuang

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 3

参考文献 30

相关文章 2

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王庆, 潘雪瑶. 英语同译词心理表征发展中的语义迁移机制[J]. 当代外语研究, 2018, 18(03): 87-92.
[2]	尚国文. 用法决定语法——认知语言学的用法基础论[J]. 当代外语研究, 2014, 14(07): 17-21.