英漢致使動詞的對比研究

1、英漢致使動詞的對比研究英漢致使動詞的對比研究 英漢致使動詞的對比研英漢致使動詞的對比研究究 A Contrastive Study of English and A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Causative VerbChinese Causative Verbs s 【作者】 周靜； 【導師】 秦裕祥； 【作者基本信息】 湖南師范大學， 英語語言文學， 2005， 碩士 【摘要】 致使概念是人類語言中的普遍概念。致使動詞是表達致使概念的最直接和最典型的語言表達形式,一直是語言研究與教學的重點內容。傳統(tǒng)語言學研究致力于描述致使動詞的語義

2、句法特征,忽視致使概念生成機制與其表達形式之間的聯(lián)系;此外,盡管關于致使動詞的語言學研究眾多,對英漢致使動詞進行系統(tǒng)的對比研究至今仍處于開始階段。因此,對英漢致使動詞進行對比研究對于理論研究和實際教學均有著重要意義。 本文將致使概念視為一個重要的認知范疇,從認知角度出發(fā),闡釋致使概念的生成機制,研究致使動詞在英漢語言中的主要表現(xiàn)形式及其句法特征,分析英漢致使動詞的共性和個性。 致使作為一個人類的基本概念,以人類對于客觀世界中致使事件的經(jīng)驗為基礎,其本質為致使者和被致使者之間力的傳遞。致使者對被致使者施加致使力,被致使者產(chǎn)生相應的狀態(tài)改變或行動。最原始的力形式通常表現(xiàn)為實體間有接觸的物理力,通過

3、隱喻認知機制,物理力投射到抽象空間,表現(xiàn)為抽象的非物理力,通常為表達致使者意愿的心理力。 致使動詞是致使概念最核心的表達方式,是用來表述兩個實體或事件間的致使關系的動詞。傳統(tǒng)語言學研究將致使動詞分為詞匯型致使動詞、形態(tài)型致使動詞和分析型致使動詞。而詞匯型致使動詞、形態(tài)型致使動詞屬于詞匯層面,分析型致使動詞屬于句法層面。這種分類法將不同層面的語言現(xiàn)象置于同一平面來劃分,增加了對致使動詞的理解和學習的難度。因此,本文從意義和形式兩個角度對致使動詞進行分類。從意義的角度,我們以致使生成過程中是否有致使者主觀意愿的參與為標準,將致使動詞兩分為客觀致使動詞和主觀致使動詞;客觀致使動詞描述的是無致使者主觀

4、意愿參與的力傳遞,可分解為兩個語義因子:致使力和狀態(tài)改變;主觀致使動詞描述的是有致使者主觀意愿參與的力傳遞,可分解為三個語義因 更多還原 【Abstract】 Causation is pervasive in human languages. Causative verbs, as the most direct and prototypical way of expressing causation, have long been focused on in the field of linguistic studies and language teaching. Conventiona

5、l linguists have confined their studies on causation to the semantic and syntactic features of causative verbs, not paying enough attention to the relations between the conceptualization of causation and causative expressions. Besides, though they have studied various aspects of causation, the contr

6、astive study of English and Chinese causative verbs is still at the beginning stage. Thus, a contrastive study on causative verbs has its great significance in theoretical studies and practical teaching.In this thesis, causation is regarded as an important cognitive category. Much effort is devoted

7、to the exploration of how causation is conceptualized, how causative verbs are represented in English and Chinese and the interpretation of the similarities and differences between English and Chinese causative verbs.Causation, as a human basic concept, is based on human experience of causative even

8、ts in the actual world. Its essence is a kind of force transmission. This force is transmitted from the causer to the causee so that the latter undergoes a change of state or performs an action. Originally, it is a physical one, with physical contact between entities. Through metaphor, the physical

9、force is mapped onto the domain of the mental world and expressed as a kind of mental force.Causative verbs refer to those which express a causal relation between two entities or events. Conventional linguists classify it into three subtypes: lexical causative verbs, morphological causative verbs an

10、d analytic causative verbs. The former two subtypes are at the lexicallevel, while the latter is at the syntactic level. Under this classification, linguistic phenomena at different linguistic levels are classified at the same level, which makes it difficult for us to interpret and learn causation.

11、Therefore, in this thesis, we propose two new classifications. First, from the angle of meaning, with the criterion of whether the volition of the causer is involved, we classify causative verbs into objective causative verbs and subjective causative verbs. Objective causative verbs depict force tra

12、nsmission without the involvement of the volition of the causer;thus, the causer can be both animate and inanimate. They can be decomposed into two semantic primitives: force and transition. Subjective causative verbs depict force transmission with the involvement of the volition of the causer;thus,

13、 the causer should be animate. They can be decomposed into three semantic primitives: purpose, force and transition. Second, from the angle of form, with the criterion of whether there are causative markers, we classify causative verbs into derivative causative verbs and non-derivative causative ver

14、bs. Derivative causative verbs have causative markers while non-derivative causative verbs have no causative markers.On the basis of the two classifications, we have contrasted causative verbs in both English and Chinese at the semantic level and the syntactic level. After much data analysis and con

15、trast, we found that English and Chinese causative verbs are similar in semantic features, but different in form and in some syntactic representations. Objective causative verbs in both English and Chinese have such semantic features as force transmission, change of state and no involvement of the c

16、ausers volition;subjective causative verbs in English and Chinese have such semantic features as force transmission, change of state and involvement of the causers volition. The conceptualization of causationdetermines that causative verbs are transitive;hence, at the syntactic level, both English a

17、nd Chinese causative constructions have the basic sentence structures: SVO and SVOC. But in ways of expressing causation and syntactic features, English and Chinese causative verbs differ from each other greatly and have their own specific linguistic representations. English verbs usually denote bot

18、h actions and results, but their equivalents in Chinese are often Verb+ Result (VR) phrases which indicate fulfillment. VR phrases are highly productive. They are widely used to denote an action and its fulfillment at the same time. Besides, in English, the form of complement in SVOC shows great div

19、ersity. It can be in the form of infinitives, -ed/-ing participles, adjectives, adverbs, or prepositional phrases, etc. In Chinese, however, the complement in SVOC is generally represented by a bare verb.In sum, there are diversified ways of expressing causation in English but in Chinese, the ways o

20、f expressing causation are relatively fewer in kind. We attribute these to basic differences between the two languages in typology and in the ways of conceptualization of causation between English-speaking and Chinese-speaking peoples.To sum up, in this thesis, we have combined the conceptualization

21、 of causation with the interpretation of semantic and syntactic features of causative verbs in English and Chinese. It provides us a new perspective for future contrastive studies of English and Chinese verbs. 更多還原 【關鍵詞】 英語； 漢語； 致使動詞； 認知； 對比研究； 【Key words】 English； Chinese； causative verbs； cognitio

22、n； contrastive study； 參考文獻： 移動動詞的指示性俄、英、漢移動動詞對比分析 格式：pdf | 發(fā)布者：欣欣狼 | 發(fā)布時間：2010-12-06 在移動動詞語義成分中，既有表示“移動”這一行為的客觀特征的成份，又有表示方向意義的成份。表示方向的意義既可以表示向(或離開)一個客觀方向的運動，也可以表示向(或離開. 漢英翻譯中的合句 格式：pdf | 發(fā)布者：零落知 | 發(fā)布時間：2010-09-10 漢譯英的詞類轉換技巧 格式：pdf | 發(fā)布者：不懂事的大叔 | 發(fā)布時間：2010-09-16 詞類轉換是漢譯英中很重要的手段之一，運用得當，可使譯文通順流暢，符合英語習慣

23、，否則譯文可能變得生硬累贅。在漢英翻譯中可進行各種詞類的轉換，例如：漢語動詞轉換成英語. 英漢致使表達的差異 格式：pdf | 發(fā)布者：kfccn | 發(fā)布時間：2010-09-16 文章基于認知語言學的理論對英漢致使表達進行了對比研究,發(fā)現(xiàn)由于人類的基本認知和認知心理的相同,英漢語在致使表達上具有很多跨文化的相同點,英漢致使表達的差異性在于文化. 談談英漢動詞的互譯 格式：pdf | 發(fā)布者：loveblue0809 | 發(fā)布時間：2010-09-16 在英漢互譯實踐中，原來屬于某種詞類的詞，有時必須轉為另一種不同的詞類。特別是由于兩種語言在動詞的使用上存在著差異，因此在動詞的互譯方面更值得

24、注意?？梢酝ㄟ^動詞的轉. 英漢致使動詞的對比研英漢致使動詞的對比研究究 A Contrastive Study of English and A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Causative VerbChinese Causative Verbs s 【作者】 周靜； 【導師】 秦裕祥； 【作者基本信息】 湖南師范大學， 英語語言文學， 2005， 碩士 【摘要】 致使概念是人類語言中的普遍概念。致使動詞是表達致使概念的最直接和最典型的語言表達形式,一直是語言研究與教學的重點內容。傳統(tǒng)語言學研究致力于描述致使動詞的語義句法特征,忽視致使概

25、念生成機制與其表達形式之間的聯(lián)系;此外,盡管關于致使動詞的語言學研究眾多,對英漢致使動詞進行系統(tǒng)的對比研究至今仍處于開始階段。因此,對英漢致使動詞進行對比研究對于理論研究和實際教學均有著重要意義。 本文將致使概念視為一個重要的認知范疇,從認知角度出發(fā),闡釋致使概念的生成機制,研究致使動詞在英漢語言中的主要表現(xiàn)形式及其句法特征,分析英漢致使動詞的共性和個性。 致使作為一個人類的基本概念,以人類對于客觀世界中致使事件的經(jīng)驗為基礎,其本質為致使者和被致使者之間力的傳遞。致使者對被致使者施加致使力,被致使者產(chǎn)生相應的狀態(tài)改變或行動。最原始的力形式通常表現(xiàn)為實體間有接觸的物理力,通過隱喻認知機制,物理力

26、投射到抽象空間,表現(xiàn)為抽象的非物理力,通常為表達致使者意愿的心理力。 致使動詞是致使概念最核心的表達方式,是用來表述兩個實體或事件間的致使關系的動詞。傳統(tǒng)語言學研究將致使動詞分為詞匯型致使動詞、形態(tài)型致使動詞和分析型致使動詞。而詞匯型致使動詞、形態(tài)型致使動詞屬于詞匯層面,分析型致使動詞屬于句法層面。這種分類法將不同層面的語言現(xiàn)象置于同一平面來劃分,增加了對致使動詞的理解和學習的難度。因此,本文從意義和形式兩個角度對致使動詞進行分類。從意義的角度,我們以致使生成過程中是否有致使者主觀意愿的參與為標準,將致使動詞兩分為客觀致使動詞和主觀致使動詞;客觀致使動詞描述的是無致使者主觀意愿參與的力傳遞,可

27、分解為兩個語義因子:致使力和狀態(tài)改變;主觀致使動詞描述的是有致使者主觀意愿參與的力傳遞,可分解為三個語義因 更多還原 【Abstract】 Causation is pervasive in human languages. Causative verbs, as the most direct and prototypical way of expressing causation, have long been focused on in the field of linguistic studies and language teaching. Conventional linguist

28、s have confined their studies on causation to the semantic and syntactic features of causative verbs, not paying enough attention to the relations between the conceptualization of causation and causative expressions. Besides, though they have studied various aspects of causation, the contrastive stu

29、dy of English and Chinese causative verbs is still at the beginning stage. Thus, a contrastive study on causative verbs has its great significance in theoretical studies and practical teaching.In this thesis, causation is regarded as an important cognitive category. Much effort is devoted to the exp

30、loration of how causation is conceptualized, how causative verbs are represented in English and Chinese and the interpretation of the similarities and differences between English and Chinese causative verbs.Causation, as a human basic concept, is based on human experience of causative events in the

31、actual world. Its essence is a kind of force transmission. This force is transmitted from the causer to the causee so that the latter undergoes a change of state or performs an action. Originally, it is a physical one, with physical contact between entities. Through metaphor, the physical force is m

32、apped onto the domain of the mental world and expressed as a kind of mental force.Causative verbs refer to those which express a causal relation between two entities or events. Conventional linguists classify it into three subtypes: lexical causative verbs, morphological causative verbs and analytic

33、 causative verbs. The former two subtypes are at the lexicallevel, while the latter is at the syntactic level. Under this classification, linguistic phenomena at different linguistic levels are classified at the same level, which makes it difficult for us to interpret and learn causation. Therefore,

34、 in this thesis, we propose two new classifications. First, from the angle of meaning, with the criterion of whether the volition of the causer is involved, we classify causative verbs into objective causative verbs and subjective causative verbs. Objective causative verbs depict force transmission

35、without the involvement of the volition of the causer;thus, the causer can be both animate and inanimate. They can be decomposed into two semantic primitives: force and transition. Subjective causative verbs depict force transmission with the involvement of the volition of the causer;thus, the cause

36、r should be animate. They can be decomposed into three semantic primitives: purpose, force and transition. Second, from the angle of form, with the criterion of whether there are causative markers, we classify causative verbs into derivative causative verbs and non-derivative causative verbs. Deriva

37、tive causative verbs have causative markers while non-derivative causative verbs have no causative markers.On the basis of the two classifications, we have contrasted causative verbs in both English and Chinese at the semantic level and the syntactic level. After much data analysis and contrast, we

38、found that English and Chinese causative verbs are similar in semantic features, but different in form and in some syntactic representations. Objective causative verbs in both English and Chinese have such semantic features as force transmission, change of state and no involvement of the causers vol

39、ition;subjective causative verbs in English and Chinese have such semantic features as force transmission, change of state and involvement of the causers volition. The conceptualization of causationdetermines that causative verbs are transitive;hence, at the syntactic level, both English and Chinese

40、 causative constructions have the basic sentence structures: SVO and SVOC. But in ways of expressing causation and syntactic features, English and Chinese causative verbs differ from each other greatly and have their own specific linguistic representations. English verbs usually denote both actions

41、and results, but their equivalents in Chinese are often Verb+ Result (VR) phrases which indicate fulfillment. VR phrases are highly productive. They are widely used to denote an action and its fulfillment at the same time. Besides, in English, the form of complement in SVOC shows great diversity. It can be in the form of infinitives, -ed/-ing participles, adjectives, adverbs, or prepositional phrases, etc. In Chinese,