Object-conditioned differential marking in Chintang and Nepali
Object-conditioned differential marking in Chintang and Nepali
复制标题
钦唐语和尼泊尔语的对象条件差异标记
DOI：
10.5167/uzh-85666
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
0.8
通讯作者：
R. Schikowski
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Schikowski
本研究涉及在尼泊尔两种语言中发现的两种句法交替模式：尼泊尔语（印欧语>印度雅利安语>）的差异对象标记（DOM）和与钦唐语（藏缅语>基兰语）的差异代理标记相关的差异对象索引（DOI）。本研究的目的是在语料库标注的基础上，对这两种现象进行深入分析，包括必要的方法创新，并对它们进行比较，从而得出一般情况下由对象属性决定的变化的结论。对尼泊尔DOM的调查表明，虽然这种现象在形式上很简单，但在功能上却非常复杂。它受到对象的大量属性的制约，其中许多属性以前没有被注意到，比如活力、特异性、可量化性、话题性、词性、焦点、情感和角色模糊性。基于规则的方法既不能涵盖自然语言中这一领域的所有变化，也不能以概念上合理的方式对DOM建模。基于这些原因，以逻辑回归的形式进行概率分析，并证明其优于基于规则的分析。相比之下，金堂DOI在功能上是简单的，基本上是由一个因素（特异性）决定的，但在形式上却以复杂的方式与许多其他形态语法领域交织在一起，如价类、非有限分句、提升和方面标记。此外，可量化性是特异性的先决条件，这两种性质在金汤中以多种方式相互作用。尼泊尔语DOM和真唐语DOI之间的大部分差异可以追溯到大小写标注和一致性的根本差异。总体情况是DOM的主要功能是标记具有不寻常属性的对象，而DOI标记在论述中易于跟踪的对象。
This study deals with two syntactic alternation patterns found in two languages of Nepal: differential object marking (DOM) in Nepali (Indo-European > Indo-Aryan) and differential object indexing (DOI) linked to differential agent marking in Chintang (Tibeto-Burman > Kiranti). The aim of the study is to conduct in-depth analyses of these two phenomena based on corpus annotations and including necessary methodological innovations, as well as to compare them in order to reach conclusions about alternations conditioned by properties of objects in general. The investigation of Nepali DOM showed that while this phenomenon is formally simple, it is functionally highly complex. It is conditioned by a plethora of properties of the object, many of which had not been noticed before, such as animacy, specificity, quantifiability, topicality, part of speech, focus, affectedness, and role ambiguity. A rule-based approach can neither cover the full range of variation found in this area in natural language nor can it model DOM in a conceptually sound way. For these reasons, a probabilistic analysis was conducted in the form of logistic regression and shown to be superior to the rule-based analysis. By contrast, Chintang DOI turned out to be functionally simple in being basically conditioned by a single factor (specificity) but to be formally intertwined in complex ways with many other areas of morphosyntax such as valency classes, non-finite clauses, raising, and marking of aspect. In addition, it could be shown that quantifiability is a pre-condition for specificity and that these two properties interact in various ways in Chintang. Most of the differences between Nepali DOM and Chintang DOI can be traced back to fundamental differences between case marking and agreement. The general picture emerging is that the main function of DOM is to mark objects with unusual properties, whereas DOI marks objects that are easy to track in discourse.