Aspects of anaphora in Chinese and in some Germanic,Romance,and Slavic languages,the‘syntactic'versus‘pragmatic'language typology,and neo-Gricean pragmatics  

作　　者：黄衍[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京外国语大学

出　　处：《外语教学与研究》2015年第5期673-694,共22页Foreign Language Teaching and Research

摘　　要：In this article,two types of anaphora—(i)null subjects and(ii)long-distance reflexivisation— will be briefly compared and contrasted between Chinese and some Germanic,Romance,and Slavic languages,showing how they are different typologically.Following Huang(2000a,2013a),utilising intra-sentential anaphora as a testing ground,I shall re-hypothesise that languages in the world can roughly be divided into two groups:syntactic and pragmatic.Finally,I shall outline an analysis of long-distance reflexivisation in Chinese in terms of my neo-Gricean pragmatic theory of anaphora.In this article, two types of anaphora -- （i） null subjects and （ii） long-distance reflexivisationwill be briefly compared and contrasted between Chinese and some Germanic, Romance, and Slavic languages, showing how they are different typologically. Following Huang （2000a, 2013a）, utilising intra-sentential anaphora as a testing ground, I shall re-hypothesise that languages in the world can roughly be divided into two groups： syntactic and pragmatic. Finally, I shall outline an analysis of long-distance reflexivisation in Chinese in terms of my neo-Gricean pragmatic theory of anaphora.

关 键 词：ANAPHORA null subjects long-distance reflexivisation syntactic VS. PRAGMATIC LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY neo-Gricean PRAGMATIC theory of ANAPHORA 

分 类 号：H04[语言文字—语言学]