外国语

外国语 ›› 2022, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (4): 29-39.

• 语言研究 • 上一篇    

原型范畴视阈下英语方位转换构式量化研究

王欢1, 林正军2   

  1. 1. 吉林农业大学 外国语学院, 吉林 长春 130118;
    2. 北京外国语大学 英语学院, 北京 100089
  • 收稿日期:2021-09-09 发布日期:2022-08-08
  • 通讯作者: 林正军(1971-)(通讯作者),男,连云港人,博士,教授。研究方向:认知语言学和功能语言学。
  • 作者简介:王欢(1979-),女,吉林通化人,副教授,博士研究生。研究方向:认知语言学和二语习得研究。

A Quantitative Study on the English Locative Alternation Construction from the Perspective of Prototype Theory

WANG Huan1, LIN Zhengjun2   

  1. 1. College of Foreign Languages, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun 130118, China;
    2. School of English and International Studies, Beijing Foreign Studies University, Beijing 100089, China
  • Received:2021-09-09 Published:2022-08-08

摘要： 本文基于原型范畴理论,使用显著共现词项分析法计算构式搭配强度,以量化方式研究方位转换构式的范畴化问题。研究确定了图形方位构式的原型动词成员为stick和plant等,以及背景方位构式的原型动词成员为flood和line等;两类构式变体具有不同的语义特征:图形方位构式的原型语义倾向体现"放置"特征,而背景方位构式的原型语义倾向体现"覆盖"或"填充"特征;从原型效应表征方式上看,两类构式变体的关系呈连续统分布。

关键词: 原型范畴, 方位转换构式, 显著共现词项分析法, 语料库

Abstract: Based on Prototype Theory, this paper quantitatively explores the categorization of English locative alternation construction in terms of the collostruction strength through distinctive collexeme analysis.It identifies the prototypical verb members of the figure locative construction such as stick and plant, and those of the ground locative construction such as flood and line.The semantic features of the two types of construction vary from each other: the prototypical semantic tendency of the figure locative construction displays the feature of "putting", whereas the prototypical semantic tendency of the ground locative construction exhibits the feature of "covering" or "filling".The two variants display a continuum from the perspective of prototypical effect representations.

Key words: prototype, locative alternation construction, distinctive collexeme analysis, corpus

中图分类号: 

  • H04
[1] Bybee, J.Language, Usage and Cognition[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 2010.
[2] Gilquin, G.&A.McMichael.Through the prototypes of through:A corpus-based cognitive analysis[J].Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 2018, 6(1):43-70.
[3] Goldberg, A.E.Constructions:A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure[M].Chicago&London:University of Chicago Press, 1995.
[4] Goldberg, A.E.Surface generalizations:An alternative to alternations[J].Cognitive Linguistics, 2002, 13(4):327-356.
[5] Goldberg, A.E.Constructions at Work:The Nature of Generalization in Language[M].Oxford&New York:Oxford University Press, 2006.
[6] Goldberg, A.E.Verbs, constructions and semantic frames[C]//Hovav, M.R., Doron, E.&I.Sichel.Lexical Semantics, Syntax, and Event Structure.Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2010.
[7] Gries, S.T.Frequencies, probabilities, and association measures in usage-/exemplar-based linguistics:Some necessary clarifications[J].Studies in Language, 2012, 36(3):477-510.
[8] Gries, S.T.&A.Stefanowitsch.Extending collostructional analysis:A corpus-based perspective on alternations[J].International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 2004, 9(1):97-129.
[9] Iwata, S.Locative Alternation:A Lexical-constructional Approach[M].Amsterdam&Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2008.
[10] Lakoff, G.Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things:What Categories Reveal about the Mind[M].Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 1987.
[11] Levin, B.English Verb Classes and Alternations:A Preliminary Investigation[M].Chicago&London:University of Chicago Press, 1993.
[12] Nemoto, N.Verbal polysemy and frame semantics in construction grammar:Some observations on the locative alternation[C]//Fried, M.&H.C.Boas.Grammatical Constructions:Back to the Roots.Amsterdam&Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2005.
[13] Perek, F.Argument Structure in Usage-Based Construction Grammar[M].Amsterdam&Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2015.
[14] Pinker, S.Learnability and Cognition:The Acquisition of Argument Structure[M].Cambridge&London:The MIT Press, 1989.
[15] Taylor, J.R.Linguistic Categorization:Prototypes in Linguistic Theory[M].New York:Oxford University Press, 1995.
[16] Taylor, J.R.Syntactic constructions as prototype categories[C]//Tomasello, M.The New Psychology of Language:Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure.London:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1998.
[17] Taylor, J.R.Schemas, prototypes, and models:In search of the unity of the sign[C]//Tsohatzidis, S.L.Meanings and Prototypes:Studies in Linguistic Categorization.London&New York:Routledge, 2014.
[18] Tummers, J., Heylen, K.&D.Geeraerts.Usage-based approaches in cognitive linguistics:A technical state of the art[J].Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 2005, 1(2):225-261.
[19] Ungerer, F.&H.J.Schmid.An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics[M].Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2008.
[20] Winters, M.E.Toward a theory of syntactic prototypes[C]//Tsohatzidis, S.L.Meanings and Prototypes:Studies in Linguistic Categorization.London&New York:Routledge, 2014.
[21] 房印杰.搭配构式分析——应用与发展[J].现代外语,2018,41(3):425-435.
[22] 胡健,张佳易.认知语言学与语料库语言学的结合:构式搭配分析法[J].外国语,2012,35(4):61-69.
[23] 李基安.原型理论视角下的离散与模糊[J].外国语,2012,35(1):36-41.
[24] 牛保义.英语情态动词may的情境植入功能研究[J].外国语,2017,40(3):12-22.
[25] 田臻,黄妮,汪晗.词汇体、语法体与there存现构式原型性的共变[J].外国语,2015,38(5):33-43.
[26] 王欢,林正军.构式搭配分析法:用法·优势·意义——以英语way构式为例[J].西安外国语大学学报,2019,27(2):26-31.
[27] 王仁强.现代英语兼类现状研究——以《牛津高阶英语词典》(第7版)为例[J].外国语,2014,37(4):49-59.
[28] 王仁强,陈和敏.基于语料库的动词与构式关系研究——以sneeze及物动词用法的规约化为例[J].外语教学与研究,2014,46(1):19-31+158.
[29] 王寅.构式压制、词汇压制和惯性压制[J].外语与外语教学,2009,(12):5-9.
[30] 吴世雄,陈维振.范畴理论的发展及其对认知语言学的贡献[J].外国语,2004,(4):34-40.
[31] 苑趁趁,牛保义.认知语法的哲学基础探析[J].外语研究,2020,37(1):38-44.
[32] 张懂.基于语料库的汉语双及物构式原型语义模式实证研究[J].外语与外语教学,2018,(5):79-88+149.
[33] 张懂.语料库量化方法在构式语法研究中的应用[J].现代外语,2019,42(1):134-145.
[34] 张懂,许家金.英汉与格交替现象的多因素研究[J].外国语,2019,42(2):24-33.
[1] 王琴. 基于语料库的蓝诗玲鲁迅小说英译临时词创造性应用研究[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(3): 102-110.
[2] 刘晓东, 李德凤. 翻译认知过程加工路径:基于汉英双语平行语料库的实证研究[J]. 外国语, 2022, 45(2): 102-110.
[3] 刘鼎甲. 新冠肺炎疫情中美国媒体涉华报道的语料库历时分析[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(6): 52-64.
[4] 张继东, 朱亚菲. 胡塞尼小说译者风格对比——平行语料库视角[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(5): 102-114.
[5] 周冰. 趋近化理论视域下的媒体立场研究——基于德国媒体“华为威胁论”相关报道的语料库分析[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(3): 71-81.
[6] 毛文伟. 日本的语料库文体学研究:进展、问题及展望[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(3): 82-90.
[7] 刘国辉. 英语名-动转类轨迹的实证研究[J]. 外国语, 2021, 44(2): 23-30,40.
[8] 庞双子. 基于历时类比语料库的翻译文本语体显化特征的计量分析[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(6): 83-94.
[9] 张懂, 许家金. 英汉与格交替现象的多因素研究[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(2): 24-33.
[10] 赵永青, 徐建伟, 邓耀臣, 薛舒云. 中外期刊实证类论文英文摘要语阶推销功能导向研究[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(2): 45-53.
[11] 郎玥, 侯林平, 何元建. 多模态输入对同传认知加工路径影响的库助认知研究[J]. 外国语, 2019, 42(2): 75-86.
[12] 黄立波. 实证翻译研究的发展及趋势[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(6): 102-112.
[13] 王克非, 刘鼎甲. 基于超大型英汉平行语料库的英语被动结构汉译考察与分析[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(6): 79-90.
[14] 秦洪武, 孔蕾. 翻译语言影响原创语言的途径和方式——基于汉语结构复杂度的分析[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(5): 15-26.
[15] 杨敏, 符小丽. 基于语料库的“历史语篇分析”(DHA)的过程与价值——以美国主流媒体对希拉里邮件门的话语建构为例[J]. 外国语, 2018, 41(2): 77-85.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
No Suggested Reading articles found!