检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:王文斌[1] 杨静 WANG Wenbin;YANG Jing
机构地区:[1]北京外国语大学 [2]重庆师范大学
出 处:《中国外语》2022年第4期30-37,共8页Foreign Languages in China
基 金:国家语委2021年度重点项目“服务文明互鉴的外语教育学科体系建设与实践研究”(编号:ZDI145-8)的阶段性成果;北京高校高精尖学科“外语教育学”建设的支持。
摘 要:汉语和英语中均存在指元状语,而已有研究尚未充分解释指元状语的形成机制以及汉英指元状语的差异。目前,汉语相关研究聚焦于对指元状语的语义指向、性质和成因的探讨,而英语相关研究则主要关注指元状语的句法位置分布与语义解读的关系。这些研究均表现出描述者多、跨语言对比者少以及解释不充分等现象。本文认为,若想充分揭示汉英指元状语的个性,则应从汉英对比视角加强解释性研究,为汉英类型学差异的研判提供来自修饰语的佐证。There exist argument-oriented adverbials (shortened as AOAs hereafter) in both Chinese and English.However,previous studies have not yet provided adequate explanations for the formative mechanisms and differences between Chinese and English AOAs.The studies related to the Chinese language at present tend to focus on the semantic orientation,nature and motivation of AOA,while the relevant studies of the English language have concentrated on exploring the relationship between AOA’s syntactic position and its semantic interpretation.Moreover,these studies are mostly characterized as being descriptive,paying scant attention to explanatory and contrastive studies.The present study holds that it is of necessity for us to focus on the contrastive analysis of Chinese and English AOAs so as to reveal the individualities of such kind of adverbials existing in the two languages.Only in this way can we expect to tell the typological differences between Chinese and English as evidenced by relevant modifiers.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.200