Based on the interactive function of language, Cognitive Grammar comes up with the grounding theory. As a semantic function, grounding is formally represented as the grounding system in language, which is held to find realization in all nominals and finite clauses. Focusing on nominal grounding system (i.e. the determiner system), and taking Chinese bare nouns as point of access, this paper suggests that bare nouns remain ungrounded when denoting generic reference, and further argues that generic expressions have nothing to do with grounding, and that there is no iconic mapping between the determinant elements in generic NPs and the grounding function. This suggests that current grounding theory has posed too stringent constraints on form-meaning correspondence, which is difficult to hold in effect.
Brisard, F. 2002. Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference [C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bybee, J. L., R. Perkins & W. Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World [C]. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Carlson, R. E. 1977. A trophic state index for lakes [J]. Limnology and Oceanography (2): 361-69.
Croft, W. 1995. Autonomy and functionalist linguistics[J]. Language (3): 490-532.
Fischer, H. & A. Zwaan. 2008. Embodied language: A review of the role of the motor system in language comprehension [J]. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (6): 825-50.
Hopper, P. & S. Thompson. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal grammar [J]. Language (4): 703-53.
Langacker, R. W. 1990. Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar [M]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Langacker, R.W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, vol. 2: Descriptive Application [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. 2002a. Deixis and subjectivity [C]. In F. Brisard (ed.). Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference [C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 1-28.
Langacker, R. W. 2002b. Remarks on the English grounding systems [C]. In F. Brisard (ed.). Grounding: The Epistemic Footing of Deixis and Reference [C]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 29-38.
Langacker, R. W. 2004. Remarks on nominal grounding [J]. Functions of Language (1): 77-113.
Langacker, R. W. 2008a. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction [M]. New York: Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. 2008b. Enunciating the parallelism of nominal and clausal grounding [A]. In J. Lapaire, G. Desagulier & J. Guignard (eds.). Du Fait Grammatical au Fait Cognitif [C]. Pessac: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux. 17-65.
Langacker, R. W. 2009. Investigations in Cognitive Grammar [M]. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics (2 vols.) [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Saussure, F. D. 2001/1916. Course in General Linguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching & Research Press.
Scheibman, J. 2002. Point of View and Grammar: Structural Patterns of Subjectivity in American English Conversation [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Stvan, L. S. 1998. The Semantics and Pragmatics of Bare Singular Noun Phrases [D]. Illinois: Northwestern University.
Taylor, J. 2002. Cognitive Grammar [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
陈平.1987.释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念[J].中国语文(2):81-92.
董秀芳.2010.汉语光杆名词指称特性的历时演变[J].语言研究(1):11-20.
高顺全.2004.试论汉语通指的表达方式[J].语言教学与研究(3):14-21.
黄蓓.2010.顺序扫描与总体扫描:虚设的二元对立[J].天津外国语学院学报(5):20-28.
刘丹青.2002.汉语类指成分的语义属性和句法属性[J].中国语文(5):411-22.
卢鑫莹.2012.现代汉语光杆名词语义的认知语法研究:情境植入视角[D].开封:河南大学.
牛保义.2012.汉语名词“类指”义的认知假设[J].语言教学与研究(4):74-81.
沈家煊.1995.“有界”与“无界”[J].中国语文(5):367-80.
完权.2009.入场理论:认知语法的新进展[J].外国语(6):27-34.
王秀卿、王广成.2008.汉语光杆名词短语的语义解释[J].现代外语(2):131-40.
张华.2010.符号入场问题及其哲学意义[J].哲学动态(1):52-57.
周北海.2004.概称句本质与概念[J].北京大学学报(4):20-29.
