制约话题结构的诸参项——谓语类型、判断类型及指称和角色  

Constraints on Topic Structures:Predicate Types, Judgment Types,Referentiality, and Semantic Roles

作　　者：刘丹青[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院语言研究所

出　　处：《当代语言学》2018年第1期1-18,共18页Contemporary Linguistics

基　　金：中国社会科学院创新工程项目"汉语口语的跨方言调查与理论分析"的部分成果

摘　　要：本文回顾吸收已有话题研究的重要理论成果,在笔者关于话题和主语的最新对比研究基础上,以古今汉语和跨语言事实为材料,进一步发掘话题成分的句法语义特点,并与主语的属性相比较,集中关注对话题及话题标记的使用有制约作用的若干句法语义范畴,揭示其中复杂的扭曲对应关系,即参项之间基本对应而不等同的关系。涉及到四个参项:1)谓语类型。文章指出,属性谓语与话题是无标记匹配,属性谓语主体论元基本上只能是话题,而事件谓语对话题性没有要求,可以跟话题同现,也可以跟非话题主语同现。2)判断类型。文章借鉴主题判断和非主题判断对立的视角,指出话题句都由主题判断构成,而非主题判断作为语言逻辑中新近揭示出来的一种判断,具有浑然一体、不可分离的属性,虽然是主谓关系,却不能分析为话题和述题两个部分,是一种非话题结构。3)指称属性。本文指出有定和类指都是适合话题的指称属性,其中以往话题研究中关注较少的类指其实在某些话题位置上作用更加重要,而且几乎对话题有刚性要求;有定成分仍能用在某些非话题的位置上,无定成分则不适合充当话题。4)语义角色。本身与主语最匹配的施事角色,其实与话题并不是自然匹配,古汉语话题标记还特别排斥施事主语;而非施事题元充当话题则没有限制。在忽略了内部的一些扭曲对应关系之后,可以将以上参项的对立项分别列为跟话题匹配和跟主语匹配的两大系列。On the basis of previous studies on topic structures, as well as recent eontrastive research on topic and subject by the author, this paper aims to make an in-depthinvestigation into topics by an analysis of their syntactic and semantic features and a comparison of their properties with those of subjects. The focus will be placed on syntactic and semantic categories that constrain the use of topics and topic markers so as to reveal some complex and twisted correspondence between them. Based on evidence from ancient and modern Chinese, as well as some cross-linguistic data, four factors that constrain the use of topic structures are discussed in this paper： A） Predicate types. It is observed that the individual-level predicate always takes topic as its experiencer argument in an unmarked way. Nevertheless, stage-level predicates can occur either with a topical or non-topical subject, without requirements on its topicality. B） Judgment types. The distinction between categorical and thetic judgments is needed. Topic structures naturally consist of categorical judgment, while this is not so for sentences of thetic judgment, because such a sentence generally functions as an integral whole, not being able to be divided into two parts, i.e., topic and comment （ or non-topical structure）, though it may indeed feature a subject- predicate relation. C） Referentiality. Definiteness and genericity （kind-denoting） are considered referential properties of topics. Genericity, which is sometimes ignored in the studies of topics, is even more compatible with topical elements than definiteness; definite elements can occasionally occur in non-topical subject positions, whereas generic subjects almost always occur in topic positions. In addition, indefinite elements never occur in the topic position. D） Semantic roles. Agentive roles, which are generally considered to be compatible with subjects, are, in fact, not in match with topics in an unmarked way. In ancient Chinese, topic markers were never attached to agen

关 键 词：话题 谓语类型 判断类型 指称 角色 

分 类 号：H043[语言文字—语言学]