跨语言对比视角下“哪+CL+N”短语的意义本质  

作　　者：冯予力 

机构地区：[1]复旦大学

出　　处：《复旦外国语言文学论丛》2022年第2期1-12,共12页Fudan Forum on Foreign Languages and Literature

摘　　要：Feng(2014)在分析“都”与疑问短语的互动时,最先发现“哪”+CL+N(简称“哪”短语)受到认识情态而非其他情态的允准,并产生比任选义更弱的模态变化效应,并主张从认识性无定成分的视角分析此类短语的各类允准条件以及与“都”的共现情况。在此基础上,本文研究汉语“哪”短语的分布,归纳Giannakidou&Cheng(2006)的内涵性任选词分析的问题,并基于与希腊语、德语、西班牙语、罗马尼亚语及意大利语类似成分的比较,指出“哪”短语属于认识无定成分,可以被显性或隐性认识情态及广义否定语境允准。在明确“哪”短语的分布情况后,本文亦详细解析“哪”短语作为认识性无定成分所具有的语义特点。最后本文在Chierchia(2006,2013)的选项排除理论框架内解释此类短语与“都”等否定语境的共现以及对于认识情态而非道义情态的选择,并赋予“哪”短语在否定和认识情态语境下的表现一个统一的形式化表征。Feng(2014)generalizes that Chinese na‘which’+CL+N can be licensed by epistemic modal but not non-epistemic modals and exhibits a modal variation effect,which is logically weaker than the standard free choice effect,and proposes to analyze the distribution of na-phrases within the framework of epistemic indefinites.In this context,this paper further pins down the licensing conditions and semantic features of na-phrases as epistemic indefinites.After sorting out the problems of the free choice analysis by Giannakidou&Cheng(2006),it argues that na-phrases can be licensed by explicit or implicit epistemic modals and negative polarity contexts,and behave more like epistemic indefinites than free choice items as compared to similar expressions in Greek,German,Spanish,Romanian and Italian.Based on the crosslinguistic comparision,it further presents a uniform formal analysis of such expressions using Chierchia’s(2006,2013)theory of alternative exhaustification.

关 键 词：哪 疑问词 任选词 认识性无定成分 选项语义 

分 类 号：H146.3[语言文字—汉语]