离合词与词法句法的分工——再议“同源宾语说”  

Separable Verb-Object Compounds in Chinese and the Division of Labor between Morphology and Syntax:The Analysis of Cognate Object Revisited

作　　者：朱佳蕾 刘凤樨 ZHU Jialei;LIU Feng-Hsi(Institute of Linguistics,Shanghai International Studies University,550 West Dalian Road,Shanghai 200083;Department of East Asian Studies,University of Arizona,1512 E First Street,Tucson,AZ 85721-0105,USA)

机构地区：[1]上海外国语大学语言研究院,上海市虹口区200083 [2]美国亚利桑那大学东亚系

出　　处：《当代语言学》2020年第3期317-334,共18页Contemporary Linguistics

基　　金：国家留学基金委项目([2018]10038);上海市哲学社会科学规划课题(2019EYY002)的资助。

摘　　要：潘海华、叶狂(2015)在词汇主义的理论前提下,提出汉语离合词实为不及物动词带同源宾语并经过音系删略(PF-deletion)所形成的结构。该分析试图解决离合词分离时粘着语素直接入句给词汇主义理论带来的问题,也为离合词研究带来了全新的视角。但本文指出同源宾语说虽然坚持词库-句法应分清界限,实际上在离合同源结构的推衍过程中并未将词汇主义贯彻到底,PF-删略词内成分违反了词汇完整性假说,离合词拷贝的名物化也无法解释离合词内宾语的特性。除了句法推衍的问题之外,本文还指出,同源宾语假设的一个前提,即离合词是不及物动词,不符合离合词表现出的句法分布:离合词与典型的及物动词加宾语的结构具有相同的句法分布,与不及物动词表现不同。最后本文指出,离合词中动宾的句法形态依存性以及语义不可分离性都不足以判定词/短语。Although separable verb-object compounds(known as lihe ci)have been extensively discussed in the literature,their status as words or phrases remains controversial.If treated as words,they would incur violations of the Lexical Integrity Hypothesis(LIH)when V and O are separated by syntactic elements,such as aspect markers,possessors,or quantity expressions(e.g.,bang-le mang‘helped’;bang ta-de mang‘help him’;bang yi-ci mang‘help once’).On the other hand,if they are analyzed as phrases,the morphological dependency between the two morphemes(e.g.,dao-qian say-apology,‘apologize’)and the semantic idiosyncrasy(e.g.,chui-niu blow-cow,‘brag’),which remains intact even when V and O are apart,would be difficult to explain.In an attempt to solve the paradox and maintain the LIH,Pan and Ye(2015)and Ye and Pan(2018)suggest that these compounds are underlyingly cognate object constructions with disyllabic intransitive verbs.Four steps are proposed to derive the surface form:(a)a compound(e.g.,bang-mang‘help’),inserted as an intransitive verb,takes its copy as its complement([V bang-mang[V[copy]bang-mang]]),(b)the copy is nominalized([V bang-mang[V[copy]→N bang-mang]]),(c)dependent elements of the copy are generated in NP syntax([V bang-mang[DP[NP ta-de[N bang-mang]]]]),and(d)a complementary PF-deletion rule applies to the internal part of the verb and its copy([V bang-mang[DP[NP ta-de[N bang-mang]]]]).In this study we show that this analysis is untenable.The proposed syntactic derivations face a number of challenges.First,the obligatory PF-deletion rule is ad hoc;more importantly,as it targets the internal part of a compound and its copy,both considered words,it effectively nullifies the LIH,which is what motivates the analysis in the first place.Second,the nominalization of the cognate object in syntax makes the prediction that O in VO compounds would exhibit verbal features,such as the ability to take adverbial modifiers,similar to gerundives in English(e.g.,enemy s rapidly destroying the city).This

关 键 词：离合词 粘着语素 同源宾语说 词库/句法分界 过度生成 

分 类 号：H04[语言文字—语言学]