' "! "! ". $ "!!, "!! %!!. (", "! %!, !,! %!!!. ( " "!,!. )!", "!,. #", per se.,.. "!, % "!. * " " " -

Transcription

1 (- ) 1 (Nikolaeva 2001),,!!" ( ",,, )! -" (#),!! (, É Kiss 1995; Erteschik-Shir 1997 ) $ «"»!", "! -!!!!! % (Reinhart 1982; Gundel 1988; Vallduví 1992; Lambrecht 1994) &! (Lambrecht 1994), #!, «"» () "! $"!! % %: ) % ; )!! % ' "! "! " $ "!!, "!! %!! (", "! %!, "! $"!,! %!!! ( " "!,! )!", "!, #", per se, "!, % "! * " " " -,!!, #, ( ) (!,!" #,,, +! the semantic component of a pragmatically structured proposition whereby the assertion differs from the presupposition (Lambrecht 1994: 213),%!! % #",, " "!, % +!,!!!",,,! (Kuno 1972; Dik 1989; Reinhart 1982; Gundel 1988; Lambrecht 1994),, " (what the sentence is ABOUT) #!, " "!!, ("),! -

2 ,,!! (saliency), ", " ", " " (" ) (,,!, - ( ) ",, ",, (Strawson 1964, 1974),,! #",!,!, "! (presupposition of existence) ", -, (1b) (1) a What is John doing? or: What about John? b He is drinking BEER he,, "! John is doing X, " X = is drinking beer + (,!"!) is drinking beer,, (1b), : * #, He is drinking BEER,! /,! * " ", # ( " ",, " "! +, : (2) What happened? JOHN died $ % (!! %),, " "! ", #!, $ ", " "!,,, ( Chafe 1987, 1994; Gundel, Hedberg and Zacharski 1993, ) 2,! %,! 0,! (,, Reinhart 1982), ", -" "!!! 1,, ", " " " -, ", "! (! " %,!!, ", " 2

3 !! (" ", " " ), "! - ",(-,2 1-##,, : A sentence containing two (or more) topics, in addition to conveying information about the topic referents, conveys information about the relation that holds between them as arguments in the proposition (Lambrecht 1994: 148) * %! "!, (3) (3) a Whatever became of John? b He married Rosa, c but he didn t really love her (Lambrecht 1994: 148) 3

4 (3b) John, - he +! married Rosa,, $ (3) " 3,, % 3, 4!,, " 3 * ", " 4! % (3b)! (3) 3, (3)!, " 3 4! "!! % $"!,,!!: John did to Rosa John stands in a relation to Rosa ", " 5 = did not really love, (3) % % 3 4! (!, (3)! ( " (3b)) 6, ", "! % 3 4! #",, % (! ";!: (4) " :, " % -",! % ", " ",,!" %, " ( (3) " 3)!, ", ",! ", ( ),, her (3), (Lambrecht 1994) (Erteschik-Shir 1997),! /! ",! "! %,! "! ", "!! "! ", ", #,,,, - () (" "! ", " 3 / (! 3), (! 4) 3!-! " %, " " -"! $ " -" " " /, " " / (Givón 1984a, 1984b: ; Sasse 1984; Croft 1991 ),, " /!! " 3, / " " ; " ",!,, " (4),! " (" " ) ", ",! 4

5 " / ( /),! ",, 5%!, " " / (Du Bois 1987; Comrie 1989) ( :, / " ",, *, " /-" ", ", -", /, "! / ", ", " " ( Dixon 1989: 101) "!"! /,! (, Meinunger 1998 ) ",, "!" ",! x!x / 1,!"! -!,, / " / "! /! -, /,!,!! / /! /!!" " " ",, /, " %,,! / ",, # ( /-" /) )!!",,!, / % (", " "!!)! Choi (1999), " "! /!,! #,/,, (!!, ",! ), (5) (5) a Was hast du gestern gelesen? b Ich habe gestern das BUCH gelesen c *Ich habe das BUCH gestern gelesen #", / (5b) -, /, ",! (, - / ) (6) Wem hast du das Buch gegeben? b Ich habe es/das Buch meinem BRUDER gegeben c? Ich habe meinem BRUDER das Buch gegeben (6)! " das Buch (6b) (6), %, "-" (ich) "-" (das Buch)!,! /-"!,!! %, " " (, ", " )! %! %! * 5

6 !, (Vallduví 1992 ),!!, (Lambrecht 1986) -,?, " ", "!! (!! ): (7) a [L odia] 313, b L amo [l odia], el bròquil,$4 313,$4 6 c De bròquil l amo [no en menja]!,$4 6 ", (7b), " ",!! (l amo ) (el bròquil) (7)! (!,!!! /! "! / (!), (/ )! / % ba," S-V- O, /, ba, % : S-ba-O-V!" "! ba- (,, Liu 1998 ) 0, "!",! #-! Tsao (1987),!,!, " ba-/ " &!,! (Thompson 1973) Tsao ", " X- ba-y-v " X Y?, : (8) ) %? ta ba tade qiche mai-le BA % -7$, % 3 Thompson!", "! $!! #, Tsao, X Y,! %, "!, " ", (4) -, "! ba " X?, (8) (9)( " Y (/) "! ", " (9) )? ta mai-le tade qiche -7$ %, % 6

7 - " " / /!! / : /, /! *,, "!,, -, /!" " «/» ( Nikoleva 1999, 2001)!! "", (Bresnan & Mchombo 1987), /! /, : (10) a njûchi [zi-ná-lúm-a alenje] " 06-$4--#-3 $" b njûchi alenje [zi-ná-wá-lúm-a] " 06-$4-,6--#-3 ), " *njûchi alenje [zi-ná-lúm-a] " 06-$4--#-3 (10) /, / (10b) /!,! 6 8",, " /!, (10),,, (10),, / %, ", "! /,!,, " (10b) ( /!, %, %!, ", ",/,!,, /,!, (!, -" /! ( " "!) * / 4 "- ", ",, "! " " ', "!! 2, " -" % " $,, ",, " "! " (/), ",!", *,!!, ", & ", % " -! "-, ", ", -, 5,, ( ) ",!! ( pars pro toto) 6,, " ( 7

8 , ", " ),!" " (reference-point, Langacker 1993 )!" ", &, ", "! "!" 1!" " ",!", "! " 8! 3, " /! ", " "! % " / " -,, #",! %, " (), " % " " ( ) * ", " %: -, -!,, -, ", " - " $, % ",, 5 % "!,,, "! #,, ",!",! "! # (" ),!" (! % (external possessor),! " " ",, " ( Payne & Barshi 1999) -"! ",!", " ", (!) / / "! #,, " " / / (! 3) $,! /, ",,! /, " ( ) - " -!!!, % ", " /! 1 ",!,, % " (/) ",! "? (11)!, %!, " (11b) (11) Mihi-nun Peter-lul meli-lul ttayli-ess-ta 8 -(,$ $-7-7 -$ $ b *Mihi-nun Peter-lul cha-lul ttayli-ess-ta 8 -(,$ $-7-7 -$ % $ 8

9 -,,! $ (12)??, " ; ( ") ", ( ") (11)! (12) Mihi-nun Peter-uy meli-lul ttayli-ess-ta 8 -(,$ $ $ $ % ", " ba /-" -, % ( " ) "!, % " / * " (13) (13) ta ba juzi bao-le pi BA -7$, ( "?,? (! ",! ba $, % ", "!, - " ", # (,!",! /, $ (14) "!? ' /, / $ (14b) "! #? ' ",! / -, (14), ", % "-,! /, " (14b)!, /! (14) Tam e:wi a:t wa:n-s- m (*wa:n-s-e:m) % -$ $4-113,6 & % b Tam e:wi a:t wa:n-s-e:m (*wa:n-s- m) % -$4-113,6 -$4-113 ) %, () Tam e:wi xo:t wa:n-s- m (*wa:n-s-e:m) % -$ $4-113,6 ) %, () 5!!,, / "!!, ",,,!!!,!,,!!! (Shibatani 1994),, " " 9

10 ,, ", " /!! (Bell 1983: 192 3; Velázquez- Castillo 1996: ) " ; ", ", ", %, %!",, $,,, " " #!,!, ", "!,,,,, " # 7!, 7$, 1-, 31, 13 ", #-3,,6 /,,$4, $4 % %, 06 / $ Bell, Sarah J (1983) Advancements and ascensions in Cebuano In Studies in Relational Grammar, David Perlmutter (ed), Vol 1, Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press Bresnan, Joan; and Mchombo, Sam (1987) Topic, pronoun, and agreement in Chiche9a Language 63, Chafe, Wallace L (1987) Cognitive constraints and information flow In Coherence and grounding in discourse, Russel S Tomlin (ed), Amsterdam: John Benjamins (1994) Discourse, consciousness and time The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press Choi, Hye-Won (1999) Optimizing structure in context: Scrambling and information structure Stanford: CSLI Publications Comrie, Bernard (1989) Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology Oxford: Blackwell Croft, William (1991) Syntactic categories and grammatical relations Chicago: University of Chicago Press Dik, Simon C (1989) The theory of Functional Grammar Part 1 The structure of the clause Dordrecht, Providence: Foris Dixon, Robert W (1989) Subject and object in Universal Grammar In Essays on grammatical theory and Universal Grammar, Dong Arnold, Martin Atkinson, Jacques Durand, Claire Grover, and Louisa Sadler (eds), Oxford: Clarendon Press Du Bois, John W (1987) The discourse basis of ergativity Language 63, É Kiss, Katalin (1995) (ed) Discourse configurational languages New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press Erteschik-Shir, Nomi (1997) The dynamics of focus structure Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Givón, Talmy (1984) Direct object and dative shifting: semantic and pragmatic case In Objects Towards a theory of grammatical relations, Frans Plank (ed), London, Orlando: Academic Press (1984b) Syntax A functional typological introduction Vol 1 Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins (1990) Syntax A functional typological introduction Vol 2 Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Gundel, Jeanette (1988) The role of topic and comment in linguistic theory New York, London: Garland Gundel, Jeanette K, Nancy Hedberg; and Ron Zacharski 1993 Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse Language 69, Kuno, Susumo (1972) Functional Sentence Perspective: a case study from Japanese and English Linguistic Inquiry 3,

11 Lambrecht, Knud (1986) Topic, focus, and the grammar of spoken French Unpublished doctoral dissertation University of California, Berkeley (1994) Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Langaker, Ronald W (1993) Reference-point constructions Cognitive linguistics 4: 1 38 Liu, Feng-hsi (1998) Structure preservation and transitivity The case of Chinese ba sentences In Functionalism and formalism in linguistics, Edith Moravcsik, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan, and Kathleen Wheatley (eds), vol 2, Studies in language companion 42 Amsterdam: John Benjamins Meinunger, André (1998), Topicality and agreement In Functionalism and formalism in linguistics, Edith Moravcsik, Frederick Newmeyer, Michael Noonan, and Kathleen Wheatley (eds), vol 2, Studies in language companion 42 Amsterdam: John Benjamins Nikolaeva, Irina (1999) Object agreement, grammatical relations, and information structure Studies in Language 23, (2001) Secondary topic as a relation in Information structure Linguistics 39, 1 49 Payne, Doris L and Immanuel Barshi (1999) (eds) External possession TSL 39 Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Reinhart, Tanya (1982) Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics Philosophica 27, Sasse, Hans-Jürgen (1984) The pragmatics of noun incorporation in Eastern Cushitic languages In Objects Towards a theory of grammatical relations, Frans Plank (ed), London, Orlando: Academic Press Shibatani, Masayoshi (1994) An integrational approach to possessor raising, ethical datives, and adversative passives BLS 20: Strawson, Paul F (1964) Identifying reference and truth-values In Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader, Danny D Steinberg and Leon A Jakobovitz (eds), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1974) Subject and predicate in logic and grammar London: Methuen Thompson, Sandra (1973) Transitivity and some problems with ba construction in Mandarin Chinese Journal of Chinese linguistics 1, Tsao, Feng-fu (1987) A topic-comment approach to the ba construction Journal of Chinese linguistics 15, 1 53 Vallduví, Enric (1992) The informational component New York: Garland Velázquez-Castillo, Maura (1996) The grammar of possession Inalienability, incorporation and possessor ascension in Guaraní Studies in language companion series, 33 Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins 11