Practical and Theoretical Studies of Sentence-Final Adjoined Elements in English

在本研究项目的前一年，我们首先仔细检查了先前发表的相关论文中引用的观察和分析。接下来，指出以前分析的问题，我们考虑是否有可能使观测结果与最近的理论仪器相一致。因此，我们得出结论，句末伴随成分的分布特征很难在拉森框架内得到解释。我们还从经验的角度考察了句末附加成分的语义特征。句末附加成分在句子中表达新的信息，一直被认为是句子中的标记成分。我们发现拉尔森框架与这一观点直接矛盾，并考虑了句末伴随成分是否可以被认为是句子中的无标记成分。在本研究项目的后期，我们重新考察了句末伴随成分的性质，提出了句末伴随成分应分为两类。我们认为，句末附加成分，包括一些处所状语、一些情景状语以及被动句和中动句中的状语，应该分开处理。我们还论证了一些句末附加成分应该是由移位派生的，这支持了Johnson和Nakajima的分析，并表明只有采取向右移位确实存在并由某种语义推动力诱导的立场，才能解释插话、主语提升和WH移位之间复杂的语言行为模式。

In the former year of this research project, we first carefully examined the observations and analyses adduced in the relevant papers published previously. Next, pointing out the problems with the previous analyses, we considered if it was possible to reconcile the observations with the recent theoretical apparatuses. As a result, we concluded that the distributional properties of sentence- final adjoined elements can hardly be accounted for within the Larsonian framework. We also examined the semantic properties of sentence-final adjoined elements in empirical points of view. The sentence-final adjoined element expresses new information in a sentence, and has been regarded as a marked element in a sentence. We showed the Larsonian framework directly contradicts this view, and considered if the sentence-final adjoined element can be taken to be an unmarked element in a sentence.In the latter year of this research project, re-examining the properties of the sentence-final adjoined elements, we proposed that the sentence-final adjoined elements should be divided into two categories. We argued that the sentence-final adjoined elements including some locational adverbials, some situational adverbials, and adverbials in passive and middle sentences, should be treated separately.. We also demonstrated that some of the sentence-final adjoined elements should be derived by movement, giving support to Johnson's and Nakajima's analyses, and showed that complicated patterns of the linguistic behavior seen among extraposition, subject raising, and Wh-movement, can be explained only if we adopt the position that rightward movement does exist and is induced by some semantic driving force.