On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization
On directionality in language change with particular reference to grammaticalization
复制标题
论语言变化的方向性，特别是语法化
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Martin Haspelmath
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Martin Haspelmath
近年来，语法化的方向性问题引起了相当大的关注，如Plank（1995）、Frajzyngier（1997）、Newmeyer（1998）等著作。5), Haspelmath (1999a)（以及随后的辩论：Geurts 2000a， b; Haspelmath 2000b），以及最近一期《语言科学》特刊（Campbell (Ed.) 2001）， Traugott (2001), Kim (2001), van der Auwera (2002), Heine（2003）等人的论文。在本文中，我想把这个问题放在一个更广泛的角度，不仅讨论语法化的单向性，而且讨论语言变化的其他领域的单向性。但主要的焦点将放在语法化上，在为语法化的单向性主张辩护之后，针对一些批评，我将检查大量所谓的单向性例外，并表明只有很少的例外可以被接受为真正的例外。本文分为三个主要部分，在这三个部分中，我将提出以下更大的观点：
The issue of the directionality of grammaticalization has attracted considerable attention in recent years, as illustrated by works such as as Plank (1995) Frajzyngier (1997), Newmeyer (1998:Ch. 5), Haspelmath (1999a) (and the ensuing debate: Geurts 2000a, b; Haspelmath 2000b), the papers in the recent special issue of Language Sciences (Campbell (Ed.) 2001), Traugott (2001), Kim (2001), van der Auwera (2002), Heine (2003), and quite a few others. In this paper, I would like to put this issue in a somewhat broader perspective, discussing not only the unidirectionality of grammaticalization, but also unidirectionality in other areas of language change. But the main focus will be on grammaticalization, and after defending the unidirectionality claim for grammaticalization against several criticisms, I will examine a substantial number of alleged exceptions to the unidirectionality and show that only very few of them can be accepted as real exceptions. The paper is divided into three main sections, in which I will make the following larger points: