17 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 17
Item 如何研究國語詞彙的意義與用式(國立台灣師範大學文學院, 1983-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語疑問句研究續論(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1984-06-??) 湯廷池The present study consists of two parts. The first part deals with Li and Thompson's (1979) semantic principle and pragmatic constraint on A-not-A ques-tsion in Chinese, and the second part with analyses of direct and indirect questions in Chinese proposed by Y. Mochizuki (1980), R.L. Cheng (1982), J. Chen (1982) and C. T. Huang (1982). Our study points out that Li and Thompson's semantic principle and pragmatic constraint are conspicuously lacking in generality as well as independent evidence and thus can be replaced by constraints which are more general and plausible. Our study also points out that such attempts as made by Mochizuki and Chen to determine the scope of question words in Chinese by means of subcategorization and/or semantic features of complement-taking verbs fall short of both descriptive adequacy and explanatory adequacy, and presents an alternative analysis to Huang's analysis by making crucial use of logical forms and the rule "Move α ".Item 英語語句的「言外之意」(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1985-06-??) 湯廷池The present paper attempts to provide plausible explanations for English sen-tences which are cognitively synonymous yet superficially different. Altogether 25 movement transformations in English are discussed and their communicative functions explained on the basis of three principles: From Old to New Principle (a pragmatic principle)' From Light to Heavy Principle (a rhythmic principle), and From Low to High Principle (a syntactic principle). Finally, several pedagogically important gener-alizations have been made with regard to the nature and function of these principles.Item 國語裏「移動α」的邏輯形式規律(國立台灣師範大學文學院, 1984-05-??) 湯廷池Item 國語疑問句的研究(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1981-06-??) 湯廷池The present work is a detailed investigation and analysis of interrogative sentences in Chinese. Section 1, an introduction, specifies the objective and scope of the study. Section 2 discusses pragmatic functions of questioning in general and presents a detailed analysis of four types of Chinese questions: particle questions, disjunctive questions, V-not-V questions and interrogative-word questions. Special emphasis is laid on the discussion of concordance between the positive-negative polarities of answer particles and anwer sentences, coocourrence restrictions between in-terrogative particles and various types of questions, and syntactic changes involved in V-not-V questions. It is suggested that all types of questions may be reduced to, or derived from, disjunctive questions. Section 3 gives a detailed analysis of interrogative words in Chinese, their interrogative use and non-interrogative uses, which include the comprehensive use, the indefinite use, the correlative use, the exclamatory use, and the rhetorical question. It is found that the non-interrogative uses of interrogative words bear a close relationship with their interrogative counter-parts in pragmatic as well as semantic function. Section 4 then examines the syntactic behaviors and constraints of embedded questions. It is pointed out that in addition to the embedding of indirect questions, direct questions may also occur as the sentential object of the verbs of direct questions, assumption, and judgment. The pragmatic functions of these verbs, together with the scope of question involved, are discussed in some detail in contrast to other types of verbs. Finally in Section 5, a conclusion, the difference in interpretation of embedded questions is shown to be a natural consequence of the embedded direct and indirect questions, and the difference in the scope of questioning involved.Item 國語語法與功用解釋(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1986-06-??) 湯廷池The present paper attempts to provide plausible explanations for Chinese sentences which are cognitively synonymous yet superficially different. Altogether 18 sentence struc-tures in Chinese along with their variant forms are discussed and their communicative functions explained on the basis of four principles: From Old to New Principle (a prag-matic principle), From Light to Heavy Principle (a rhythmic principle), From Low to High Principle (a syntactic principle), and Prom Close to Distant Principle (an empathy princi-ple). Furthermore, these same principles have been applied to the corresponding sentence structures in English to investigate whether similar sentence constructions in the two lan-guages perform similar communicative functions.Item 英語冠詞the, a(n) 與φ的意義與用法(國立台灣師範大學文學院, 1986-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語的雙賓結構(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1977-06-??) 湯廷池Item 國語形容詞的重叠規律(國立臺灣師範大學研究發展處, 1982-06-??) 湯廷池It has been pointed out by Professors Charles N. Li and Sandra A. Thompson (Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar, p. 33) that not all adjectives in Chinese can undergo reduplication and that there does not appear to be any rule governing which adjectives can be reduplicated and which adjectives cannot. The present paper argues that, contrary to Li and Thompson's analysis, there are very general rules concerning reduplication of adjectives in Chinese. The reduplication of monosyllabic adjectives, for example, is mainly dependent on a semantic consideration as to whether adjectives express an objective assessment or an subjective evaluation. The reduplication of disyllabic adjectives, on the other hand, is constrained not only semantically but also morphologically (e.g. whether the adjective is a subject-predicate construction, a verb-object con-struction, a verb-complement construction, an endocentric construction or a coordinate construction, and whether the constituent morpheme is free or bound) as well as stylistically (e.g. whether the adjective is colloquial or literary in usage). In passing, the syntactic functions of Chinese adjectives in general and a distinction between the adjectival use and the adverbial use of reduplicated adjectives have also been discussed.Item 英語詞句的「言外之意」(國立台灣師範大學文學院, 1985-06-??) 湯廷池