隋娜, 胡建华. 从英汉语比较的视角看虚词“看”的句法地位[J]. 外国语, 2024, 47(3): 2-14.
引用本文: 隋娜, 胡建华. 从英汉语比较的视角看虚词“看”的句法地位[J]. 外国语, 2024, 47(3): 2-14.
SUI Na, HU Jianhua. The Syntax of the Function Word Kan (see) in Chinese——An English-Chinese Comparative Perspective[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2024, 47(3): 2-14.
Citation: SUI Na, HU Jianhua. The Syntax of the Function Word Kan (see) in Chinese——An English-Chinese Comparative Perspective[J]. Journal of Foreign Languages, 2024, 47(3): 2-14.

从英汉语比较的视角看虚词“看”的句法地位

The Syntax of the Function Word Kan (see) in ChineseAn English-Chinese Comparative Perspective

  • 摘要: 本文从英汉比较的角度讨论汉语普通话“VP+看+S+Q”结构(即“看”字结构)中虚词“看”的句法语义。田源、徐杰(2017)提出,此类结构中的“看”已经语法化为间接问句标句词,本文认为相关语言事实并不支持他们的这一观点。本文指出,“看”与其后的疑问小句不构成一个成分;不能与“想知道、怀疑”等常选择疑问句作为其宾语的主句动词搭配;“看”出现时主句动词的形态受限制:可以是重叠式,但不能为光杆形式,不能后附“-了/过”等体助词。本文提出“看”不是间接问句标句词,而是尝试义助词。在句法上,它位于功能性中心语Moodtentative位置,以IP为其补足语。内嵌疑问句初始位置为主句动词的宾语位置,经过外置操作,嫁接到MoodtentativeP之上,在表层语序上位于句子的右边界。本文分析可以解释为何“看”对于主句动词及其形态具有选择性,以及为何“看”之后多为疑问小句,不能为陈述小句,名词短语多不能出现在“看”之后。

     

    Abstract: This paper studies the syntax and semantics of the function word kan ‘see’ in the “VP+kan+S+Q” construction (i.e. the kan-construction) in Mandarin Chinese from an English-Chinese comparative perspective. Tian & Xu (2017) claim that kan in this construction has fully grammaticalized into a functional category, namely a complementizer which introduces an indirect interrogative clause. In this paper, we show that their account is not supported by the facts and is thus untenable. First, kan and the interrogative structure following it do not form a constituent. Second, verbs like xiangzhidao ‘wonder’, huaiyi ‘doubt’ etc. which typically select interrogative clauses as their complements cannot co-occur with kan in this kind of construction. Third, when kan is present, the main verb can take the reduplicated form, but cannot occur with aspectual markers like –le or –guo. This kind of morphosyntactic property of kan would fail to be accounted for if it is treated as a complementizer taking an interrogative structure as its complement. We argue that kan is a sentence-final particle expressing tentative meaning. Syntactically, it is a functional head Moodtentative in the CP domain, taking IP as its complement (Sui & Hu 2019). The embedded interrogative structure is base-generated in the complement position of the main verb and then moved and adjoined to the MoodtentativeP via extraposition. Under our analysis, the morphosyntactic property of kan can be easily captured, and the fact that declarative sentences, or noun phrases are usually excluded from the post-kan position can be well explained.

     

/

返回文章
返回