Journal of Foreign Languages ›› 2024, Vol. 47 ›› Issue (2): 40-49.

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Chinese Word Classes and Class/Function Correspondences from the Cognitive Grammar Perspective

Jiaguang PANG()   

  1. School of Foreign Studies, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China
  • Received:2023-02-20 Online:2024-03-20 Published:2024-03-25

Abstract:

The multiple correspondences between word classes and syntactic functions in Chinese pose a great challenge to the definition and classification of word classes, leading to debates over whether Chinese word classes pertain to the noun-verb inclusion or noun-verb division model. From the cognitive grammar perspective, word classes, e.g., nouns, verbs and adjectives reside in profiling, rooted in different cognitive operations. The match or mismatch between word classes and syntactic functions is derived from the categorization (i.e., instantiation and extension) of words by the functional position in relevant grammatical constructions, particularly low-level constructions. The correspondences between the verb phrase and subject/object, the noun phrase and predicate, as well as the conversions triggered by “XP de YP” or “hen X” are all motivated by these two types of categorization. Unlike English, Chinese prefers implicit coding strategies over explicit ones, leading to a significant number of words that belong to multiple word classes. Contrary to the word class-centered view presupposed by noun-verb inclusion and noun-verb division models, the construction-centered view posits that the class of a word is derived from the categorization of the grammatical construction it enters, and the phenomenon of one word belonging to more than one class poses no theoretical problem for Chinese word classes.

Key words: word class, noun-verb inclusion model, word class/function mismatch, categorization

CLC Number: 

  • H04
Clark, E. V. & H. H. Clark. When nouns surface as verbs Language 1979 55 767 811 Clark, E. V. & H. H. Clark. When nouns surface as verbs[J]. Language, 1979, 55: 767−811.
doi: 10.2307/412745
Croft, W. Radical Construction Grammar [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Hilpert, M. Construction Grammar and its Application to English [M]. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2014.
Langacker, R. W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
Langacker, R. W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume II: Descriptive Application [M]. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991.
Langacker, R. W. Remarks on nominal grounding Functions of Language 2004 11 1 77 113 Langacker, R. W. Remarks on nominal grounding[J]. Functions of Language, 2004, 11(1): 77−113.
doi: 10.1075/fol.11.1.05lan
Langacker, R. W. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Langacker, R. W. Construction and constructional meaning [C]// Evans, V. & S. Pourcel. New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009.
Langacker, R. W. How to build an English clause Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 2015 2 1 45 Langacker, R. W. How to build an English clause[J]. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 2015, 2: 1−45.
Langacker, R. W. Nominal grounding and English quantifiers Cognitive Linguistic Studies 2016a 3 1 1 31 Langacker, R. W. Nominal grounding and English quantifiers[J]. Cognitive Linguistic Studies, 2016a, 3(1): 1−31.
Langacker, R. W. Nominal Structure in Cognitive Grammar: The Lublin Lectures [M]. Lublin: Maria Curie-Sklodowska University Press, 2016b.
Langacker, R. W. Grounding, semantic functions, and absolute quantifiers English Text Construction 2017 10 2 233 248 Langacker, R. W. Grounding, semantic functions, and absolute quantifiers[J]. English Text Construction, 2017, 10(2): 233−248.
doi: 10.1075/etc.10.2.03lan
Langacker, R. W. Trees, assemblies, chains, and windows Constructions and Frames 2020 12 1 8 55 Langacker, R. W. Trees, assemblies, chains, and windows[J]. Constructions and Frames, 2020, 12(1): 8−55.
doi: 10.1075/cf.00034.lan
Lauwers, P. Between adjective and noun: Category/function mismatch, constructional overrides and coercion [C] // Simone, R. & F. Masini. Word Classes: Nature, Typology and Representations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2014.
陈禹. 弱范畴: 从弱主语名词谈起 汉语学习 2022 4 56 64 陈禹. 弱范畴:从弱主语名词谈起[J]. 汉语学习,2022,(4):56−64.
高航. 激进构式语法视角下名词谓语句的跨语言研究 现代外语 2020 43 4 463 476 高航. 激进构式语法视角下名词谓语句的跨语言研究[J]. 现代外语,2020,43(4):463−476.
高航. 名物化的固化问题考察: 基于使用的视角 汉语学习 2023 4 23 32 高航. 名物化的固化问题考察: 基于使用的视角[J]. 汉语学习,2023,(4):23−32.
金立鑫. “名包动”理论的逻辑问题 外国语 2022 45 1 2 13 金立鑫. “名包动”理论的逻辑问题[J]. 外国语,2022,45(1):2−13.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2022.01.001
陆俭明. 汉语词类的特点到底是什么? 汉语学报 2015 51 3 2 7 陆俭明. 汉语词类的特点到底是什么?[J]. 汉语学报,2015,51(3):2−7.
陆俭明. 再论汉语词类问题——从沈家煊先生的“名动包含”观说起 东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版) 2022a 4 1 15 陆俭明. 再论汉语词类问题−从沈家煊先生的“名动包含”观说起[J]. 东北师大学报(哲学社会科学版),2022a,(4):1−15.
doi: 10.16164/j.cnki.22-1062/c.2022.04.001
陆俭明. 再议“汉语名动包含说” 外国语 2022b 45 5 2 14 陆俭明. 再议“汉语名动包含说”[J]. 外国语,2022b,45(5):2−14.
吕叔湘. 关于汉语词类的一些原则性问题(上) 中国语文 1954 9 6 14 吕叔湘. 关于汉语词类的一些原则性问题(上)[J]. 中国语文,1954,(9):6−14.
庞加光. 构式视角下的汉语名词谓语 解放军外国语学院学报 2013 36 6 20 25 庞加光. 构式视角下的汉语名词谓语[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报,2013,36(6):20−25.
庞加光. 概念语义学视角下的形容词谓语自足性 现代外语 2015 38 3 293 302 庞加光. 概念语义学视角下的形容词谓语自足性[J]. 现代外语,2015,38(3):293−302.
庞加光. 汉语认知句法学研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017.
庞加光. 论汉语语法的动态属性——以离合词和伪定语句为例 外国语 2020 43 3 25 34 庞加光. 论汉语语法的动态属性−以离合词和伪定语句为例[J]. 外国语,2020,43(3):25−34.
邵斌, 杨静. 英汉名动范畴边界渗透的类型学考察 外国语 2022 45 3 2 10 邵斌,杨静. 英汉名动范畴边界渗透的类型学考察[J]. 外国语,2022,45(3):2−10.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2022.03.001
沈家煊. 我看汉语的词类 语言科学 2009 8 1 1 12 沈家煊. 我看汉语的词类[J]. 语言科学,2009,8(1):1−12.
沈家煊. 怎样对比才有说服力——以英汉名动对比为例 现代外语 2012 35 1 1 13 沈家煊. 怎样对比才有说服力−以英汉名动对比为例[J]. 现代外语,2012,35(1):1−13.
沈家煊. 谓语的指称性 外文研究 2013 1 1 1 13 沈家煊. 谓语的指称性[J]. 外文研究,2013,1(1):1−13.
沈家煊. 形式类的分与合 现代外语 2015 38 1 1 14 沈家煊. 形式类的分与合[J]. 现代外语,2015,38(1):1−14.
沈家煊. 名词和动词[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2016.
沈家煊. 名词的定义问题 现代外语 2023a 46 3 293 305 沈家煊. 名词的定义问题[J]. 现代外语,2023a,46(3):293−305.
doi: 10.20071/j.cnki.xdwy.20230221.005
沈家煊. 评施关淦“现代汉语的向心结构和离心结构” 外国语 2023b 46 5 2 12 沈家煊. 评施关淦“现代汉语的向心结构和离心结构”[J]. 外国语,2023b,46(5):2−12.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2023.05.001
石定栩. 体词谓语句与词类的划分 汉语学报 2009 1 29 40 石定栩. 体词谓语句与词类的划分[J]. 汉语学报,2009,(1):29−40.
孙崇飞. 名动包含理论存在逻辑问题吗? 外国语 2022 45 5 15 23 孙崇飞. 名动包含理论存在逻辑问题吗?[J]. 外国语,2022,45(5):15−23.
许小艳, 桑仲刚, 庞加光. 提取和激活模型下的汉语名词谓语句研究 现代外语 2021 44 4 483 494 许小艳,桑仲刚,庞加光. 提取和激活模型下的汉语名词谓语句研究[J]. 现代外语,2021,44(4):483−494.
完权. “的”的性质与功能[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2016.
王仁强, 杨旭. “出版”的词类问题与向心结构之争 汉语学报 2017 60 4 26 35 王仁强,杨旭. “出版”的词类问题与向心结构之争[J]. 汉语学报,2017,60(4):26−35.
吴义诚. 名词和动词 外国语 2023 46 5 13 23 吴义诚. 名词和动词[J]. 外国语,2023,46(5):13−23.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-5139.2023.05.003
吴义诚, 戴颖. 有标记语言现象与语法特性研究 现代外语 2022 45 3 306 317 吴义诚,戴颖. 有标记语言现象与语法特性研究[J]. 现代外语,2022,45(3):306−317.
朱德熙. 语法答问[M]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 1985.
[1] Jianming LU. Further Discussions on "Chinese Noun-verb Inclusion Hypothesis" [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(5): 2-14.
[2] Bin SHAO,Jing YANG. A Typological Approach to Boundary Permeability of Noun and Verb Categories in English and Chinese [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2022, 45(3): 2-10.
[3] LI Fuluowa. Translation and Introduction of Qi Category: From Decategorization to Recategorization [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2021, 44(4): 103-110.
[4] ZHU Zhiyu, ZHANG Xu, HUANG Libo. Traditional Chinese Ideas on Translation-Themes and Categorization [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(2): 62-74.
[5] ZHANG Yi. Sanctioning the Inverted Use of Resultative Constructions in the Broad Sense: An Account Based on Excessive Meaning and Categorization [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages , 2016, 39(4): 2-9.
[6] LIN Qiaoli, HAN Jingquan. Parts of Speech in Chinese from the Perspective of Distributed Morphology [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages , 2011, 34(2): 47-55.
[7] WU Huaicheng. Theoretical Reflection on Transformation from Verbs to Nouns in Modern Chinese [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages , 2011, 34(2): 39-46.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
[1] ZHANG Delu. Grammatical Patterns in Engagement in the Appraisal Theory[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(2): 2 -10 .
[2] JIANG Chengyong. Stepping Towards Integration and Accommodation: Methodological Innovations in Cross-Cultural Comparative Research and Foreign Literature Studies[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(1): 103 -110 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(4): 2 -3,6 .
[4] ZHANG Dong, XU Jiajin. A Multifactorial Study of Dative Alternation in English and Chinese[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(2): 24 -33 .
[5] LI Sixu. A Linguistic Typological Study of the Locative Alternation Construction[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(1): 2 -24 .
[6] YE Jingting. Co-referential Possessors and Intensifiers in World's Languages: A Typological Perspective[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(1): 25 -38 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(4): 4 -6 .
[8] ZHANG Ying. Translating Chinese Culture from the Perspective of Actor-Network Theory(ANT): A case study of S.I.Hsiung's Lady Precious Stream[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(4): 25 -34 .
[9] LIU Jun. The Ditransitives in Southeast Asia Area: Typology and motivation[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(4): 35 -45 .
[10] YONG Qian. Tense, Aspect and Mood in Counterfactual Clauses-Pathways of Marking System: Forming, Analogy and Renovation[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2019, 42(2): 11 -23 .