论文部分内容阅读
元语否定需要区分两个层次:元1是对句子的语义命题层、言语行为层等所有可能内容的否定;实质上是对比否定,既可能是常规否定,也可能是非常规的否定;而元2是非常规的否定方式,即对言语行为的某一方面的否定。如果忽视了元1在否定范畴中的理论地位,就难以用系统的理论框架来解释不同语言的否定范畴中元2错综复杂的语义语用现象。我们认为,否定在语篇中有两种布局策略——独立格局(Neg0+S)与对比格局(〔Neg0+S〕+S’)。随着交际现场性的弱化,独立格局受“量原则”推动,倾向于表示常规的描述否定。原先表示元1层次的对比格局,则逐渐浮现出与描述否定的语义性质相反的元2层次。当然,不同语言的对比格局在进一步的语法化过程中,采取了不同的参数和路径,元2的语法化程度也不尽相同。元2的浮现本质可以很好地揭示其语义特征的不稳定性,同时也能够对类型学的材料提供较为充分的解释。
The negation of the metaphor needs to distinguish between two levels: the meta-1 is the negation of all the possible contents of the semantic layer and the speech act layer of the sentence; in essence, the contrast is negative, which may be both the conventional negation and the unconventional negation; 2 is an unconventional way to negate one aspect of speech act. If we neglect the theoretical status of Yuan 1 in the category of negation, it is hard to explain the complex and semantic pragmatics of Yuan-2 in the negative category of different languages by the systematic theoretical framework. In our opinion, there are two layout strategies in negation: Neg0 + S and contrast pattern (Neg0 + S + S ’). With the weakening of the communicative field, the independent pattern is driven by the principle of quantity, which tends to denote the conventional description of negation. Originally expressed meta-level contrast pattern, gradually emerges out of the semantic nature of the negative description of the meta-2 level. Of course, the contrast pattern of different languages takes different parameters and paths in the process of further grammaticalization, and the degree of grammaticalization of meta-2 is also different. Metaphase 2’s emergent nature can well reveal the instability of its semantic features and at the same time provide a more complete explanation of the typological materials.