港大中文學院
“開車的人”和“開車的技術”是一樣的結構嗎？
2017/2018 School of Chinese Research Students Seminar
“開車的人”和“開車的技術”是一樣的結構嗎？
Two Types of Mandarin Relative Clauses from a
Case-grammarian Perspective
姚聖 Yao Sheng
October 27 2017 (Friday), 5:30-6:45pm
Room 730, Run Run Shaw Tower, Centennial Campus
Language: Putonghua
說起“開車的”，我們馬上理解為“開車的人”的省略，不會當它是“開車的技術”的省略；說起“修車的”，我們先想到“修車的人”，或許想到“修車的工具”，卻也不會想到“修車的技術”。有一派學者據此說“動詞短語+人/工具/……”和“動詞短語+技術/時間/……”不一樣。反對派說，要害只在前一類的名詞實而後一類的虛，“虛實”是意義上的差別，不能憑它搞語法上的分化。他們最愛搬出的反例是“我在技校學了許多技術，有開車的、修車的……，多著呢”。這個反例究竟有多大力量呢？他們在句中提供“技術”二字以為綫索，等於私自放寬了條件。我們姑從前說一分為二吧，也面臨不少問題，比如：“令狐沖殺人的劍法”到底屬於“修車的工具”（實）還是“開車的技術”（虛）？這次報告，我打算先梳理種種“動+的+名”結構的生成方式，從此看出其實有兩個同形的“開車的人”，一個和“開車的技術”一樣，一個卻不一樣。那時我們還會知道，前頭說的“省略”、“虛實”、“技校”、“令狐沖”等問題並不重要。
A Mandarin relative clause is usually a “VP+de” modifier that precedes an NP. Zhu朱德熙 (1978;1983) divides such modifiers into two types: if a modifier may refer to the whole “VP+de+NP” phrase alone, e.g. 開車 的(“to drive+de”)=開車 的 人 (“to drive+de+man”, both meaning “one who drives”), it is an S-type modifier; otherwise a T-type modifier, e.g. 開車 的(“to drive+de”)≠開車 的 技術(“to drive+de+technique”, meaning “the technique with which one drives”). His challengers say that whether a modifier can refer to the whole “VP+de+NP” is not quite a syntactic question; its answer changes according to the pragmatic environment. Therefore, they say, the two types need not be divided syntactically. In this talk, I will re-investigate the “VP+de+NP” phrase using a developed case-grammar. With the VP given, each NP is possible to be assigned to a certain “case” or not; furthermore, when the case mark is missing, it is not actually assigned even if it is assignable. The consequence is that when an NP should fall into the cases “agent” or “patient” (typically unmarked), its modifier can be read as either an S-type one or a T-type one, which reveals the source of confusion between the two types.
ALL ARE WELCOME!
