英汉语法“硬与软”和汉语句型划分——与连淑能先生商榷  

Rigidity vs. Suppleness between English and Chinese Grammars,and Categorization of Chinese “Sentence Patterns”:A Discussion with Mr.Lian Shuneng

作　　者：彭长江[1] 

机构地区：[1]湖南师范大学外国语学院

出　　处：《湖南师范大学社会科学学报》2016年第6期101-107,共7页Journal of Social Science of Hunan Normal University

摘　　要：连淑能先生的《英汉对比研究》第二章"刚性与柔性"认为:英语有形态变化,句子以动词为中心,其语法"硬",汉语没有形态变化,句子不以动词为中心,其语法"软",并以此为由,爽快承认英语的五种基本句型,却拒绝承认汉语语法家们为汉语基本句型所做的划分,认为汉语句型只能"以功能意义为主、成分格局为辅"进行划分。本文证明:一切事物的一切"型",都只能按"成分格局"划分;形态变化比英语丰富得多的许多语言的句子,其"成分格局"都不一定"以动词为中心";连先生划分的汉语句型是一锅大杂烩:无数句子要么在这些"句型"中无立锥之地,要么可以同时归入几种不同的"句型";因此,连先生划分的汉语句型是站不住脚的。＂Rigid vs. Supple＂, Chapter 2 of Contrastive Studies of English and Chinese by Mr. Lian Shuneng, maintains that the grammar of English is rigid because English has inflections and its sentences are centered around verbs, while Chinese grammar is supple as Chinese has no inflections and many of its sentences contain no verbs, on the basis of which argument, the book readily recognizes the five basic sentence patterns （or clause types） in English, but denies the categorization of basic sentence patterns by all Chinese grammarians, claiming that sentence patterns in Chinese can only be distinguished by ＂taking function and meaning as the main standards, aided by constituent pat- terns＂. The present paper proves that all ＂patterns＂ of all things are classified in accordance with their ＂constituent pat- terns＂, that numerous sentences in many languages far more inflected than English are not ＂centered around the verb＂, and that Mr. Lian＇s classification of Chinese sentence patterns results in a complete hotchpotch, where numberless Chi- nese sentences either find no place in any of the ＂patterns＂ or are capable of occupying a place in several ＂patterns＂. Indefensible, therefore, is Mr. Lian＇s categorization of Chinese sentence pattems.

关 键 词：《英汉对比研究》第二章 刚性 柔性 汉语句型 

分 类 号：H146.3[语言文字—汉语] H314.3