英汉定中结构的韵律组配共性  

Universal constraints on the prosodic patterns in English and Chinese NPs

作　　者：王远杰[1] WANG Yuanjie(Institute of Chinese Language and Text Studies,Southwest University,Chongqing 400715,China)

机构地区：[1]西南大学

出　　处：《外语教学与研究》2019年第6期876-887,960,共13页Foreign Language Teaching and Research

基　　金：重庆市社会科学规划项目“汉语韵律-语法界面的单双音节问题研究”（2018YBYY136）资助

摘　　要：英语和汉语定中结构有各自的韵律组配规律,英语定中结构轻重音组配的首重式与尾重式对立,汉语定中结构单双音组配的2+1式与1+2式对立。本文揭示以往研究未予注意的英汉定中结构韵律组配的系统化平行现象,讨论各家解释模式存在的问题,然后在柯航(2012)松紧说的基础上,对这些平行现象做更为合理的统一解释。研究表明,韵律上,英语首重式和汉语2+1式内部结合紧,英语尾重式和汉语1+2式内部结合松;语义上,类指名词短语中定语的作用是给中心语分类,其定语可归为性质、状态、弱动作、强动作四类,这四类定语相对于中心语的分类性强弱排序为:强动作>弱动作>状态>性质。定语相对于中心语的分类性越强,与中心语的结合就越紧,对应的定中结构就采用紧的首重式或2+1式,反之就采用松的尾重式或1+2式。The stress pattern fore-stress(stress on the attributive)vs.end-stress(stress on the head)in English NPs systemically parallels the syllabic pattern 2+1(a disyllabic attributive modifying a monosyllabic head)vs.1+2(a monosyllabic attributive modifying a disyllabic head)in Chinese NPs.This paper shows the parallel and proposes a unified explanation based on the theory of tightness vs.looseness of Hang Ke(2012).Fore-stress and 2+1 patterns are tighter prosodic structures compared with end-stress and 1+2 patterns.The attributive in a generic NP functions as a classifying standard and can be divided semantically into quality,status,weak action,and strong action,whose classifying ability for a specific head noun is:strong action>weak action>status>quality.The more classifying ability an attributive has,the more tightly it combines with the head;and therefore,the corresponding NP takes the tight prosodic pattern fore-stress or 2+1.Conversely,the NP would take the loose prosodic pattern end-stress or 1+2.

关 键 词：轻重音组配 单双音组配 松紧说 韵律语法 英汉比较 

分 类 号：H014[语言文字—语言学]