Resultatives, Compositionality and Language Variation
Resultatives, Compositionality and Language Variation
复制标题
结果、组合性和语言变异
DOI：
10.1023/a:1008257704110
复制
发表时间：
1997
影响因子：
0.5
通讯作者：
R. Washio
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Washio
通过对英、日两种语言的对比分析，可以看出日语的容许结果集被恰当地包含在英语的容许结果集中。尽管英语结果语自然地分为及物性结果语和不及物性结果语（在Carrier和Randall（1992）的意义上），并且日语中系统地缺少不及物性结果语，但区分英语集合和日语集合并不完全是这种区别，因为日语只允许某些类型的及物性结果语，拒绝英语中可能的其他类型。像法语这样的语言在这方面基本上和日语一样。因此，“传递性结果”范畴至少应分为两类（这里称之为弱结果和强结果），并且存在一个自然的结果类，它包括强传递性结果和全不传递性结果，根据本文给出的定义，全不传递性结果总是“强”的。本文还讨论了某些表面上与结果相似的例子（这里称之为SUPRIOUS结果），并指出它们构成了一种不同的现象。最后，根据“病人身份”这一概念，对弱/强区分给出了具体的理论解释。本文还简要讨论了这种解释与子集原则的相关性。
A comparative analysis of English and Japanese shows that theset of permissible resultatives in Japanese is properly containedin the set of permissible resultatives in English. AlthoughEnglish resultatives naturally divide into transitive andintransitive resultatives (in the sense of Carrier and Randall(1992)), and intransitive resultatives are systematically missingfrom Japanese, it is not exactly this distinction that demarcatesthe English set and the Japanese set since Japanese permits onlycertain types of transitive resultatives, rejecting other typesthat would be possible in English. Languages like French areessentially like Japanese in this respect. Thus, the category"transitive resultatives" needs to be divided into at least twotypes (called here WEAK and STRONG resultatives), and there is anatural class of resultatives comprising strong transitiveresultatives and all intransitive resultatives, the latter beingalways "strong" by the definition of this notion given in thispaper. Certain examples that bear a superficial resemblance toresultatives (called here SUPRIOUS resultatives) are alsodiscussed and shown to constitute a different phenomenon.Finally, the weak/strong distinction is given a specifictheoretical interpretation in terms of the notion "patienthood."The relevance of this interpretation to the Subset Principle isalso briefly discussed.