论文部分内容阅读
Abstract： English is a language featuring its complex sentences composed of main and subordinate clauses. The subordinate clause conveys the unfinished messages in main clause and it becomes quite complicated. English complex sentence is a fair important sentence type and also of importance in English teaching. Analyzing complex sentence based on Figure-Ground Theory， especially the Adverbial Clause， is helpful to learn English and translate it. The Figure-Ground Theory originated in psychology studies and it was introduced in cognitive linguistics to explain some language phenomena. From Figure-Ground perspective， the essay studies attributive clause， adverbial clause and nominal clause and some critical sentence types have been analyzed carefully and the major finding is Figure-Ground Theory is dynamic not static. Key words： Figure-Ground Theory； attributive clause； nominal clause； adverbial clause
[中图分类号]H030
[文献标识码]A
[文章编号]1006-2831（2015）11-0149-5 doi：10.3969/j.issn.1006-2831.2015.04.043
1. Studies of Figure-Ground Theory
Figure-Ground concept was first proposed by Edgar Rubin， a well-known Danish psychologist. His famous Rubin Face/ Vase illusion explains the pair of concepts. After Rubin， psychologists had further studies on the theory and they were convinced that our cognition to objects is always separated in figure and ground. Figure is complete， compared to ground， and people always capture figure in ground. As figure has structure and coherence while ground does not， figure is always inclined to conspicuously lie in front of ground， which causes that we always firstly see and focus on figure.
There are few scholars studying English complex sentence based on Figure-Ground Theory and it is fewer for scholars to do research on words order from figure and ground. Tamly， a linguist， does not study words order directly on Figure-Ground Theory， but he points out that the general law of words order is figure precedes ground. Thus we can infer that Tamly agrees that English complex sentence reflects figure comes before ground. Liu Yan stresses that English complex sentence adopts the cognitive structure from figure to ground， while words order from ground to figure often exits in Chinese sentence. Liang Li has fulfilled her studies on English complex sentence from Figure-Ground segregation to manifest the structure of space and time in language. She found that Figure-Ground Theory has expounded that the application of language is not all ruled by grammatical laws from a new perspective. Actually it is natural related to human’s cognition. 2. Analysis of English complex sentence
An English complex sentence refers to the one， according to L.G. Alexander， that contains a large number of words， phrases， clauses and modifiers to form subordinate parts that are not of equal importance compared with main part， because the main part can often stand on its own even if the extra parts are removed from the whole sentence （Alexander， 2001）.
Complex sentences can be formed with two methods. One is joining subordinate clauses to the main clause with conjunctions. The other is using infinitive or participle constructions. They are non-finite phrases rather than clauses， but they form part of complex sentences because they can be reexpressed as clauses which are subordinate to the main clause.
In a word， a complex sentence must consist of main part and subordinate parts with phrase， non-finite or clauses.
2.1 Analysis of attributive clause
For the attributive clause， English usually puts the subordinate clause after the main clause or the antecedent. It is identified that the attributive clause provides a reference frame and setting or ground information for antecedent， which meanwhile exerts the function of classifying the previous information and providing the basis for the subsequent information. The main clause or antecedent is the focus information； the attributive clause is to modify them. Here comes to a sequence that main clause or antecedent is figure while attributive clause is ground. Take following two sentences as example.
（1） Have you found your book （that） you were looking for yesterday？
（2） This is the house where I was born and brought up.
In the first sentence， that “have you found your book” is complete. There is no missing of subject， predicate and object. It totally is in conformity with the structural laws so it should be the figure and main part. In the second sentence， they seem to be two complete sentences， which are “this is the house” and “I was born and brought up”. Truly， they are independent individuals when they are separated. However， there is an adverb，“where”， and it makes different. As relative adverbs are linked with attributive clause，“where” cannot be omitted. Thus the latter part in second sentence， which is ground， is lack of place so the previous part is figure.
Somehow， the antecedent acts as subject which is surely followed by attributive clause. In such case， attribute can segregate main clause， causing reading difficulties. Such cases often occur in sentences where nouns are subjects. （3） The hotel where we will stay is an artistic building.
（4） The reason why I come here is to meet Mr. Black.
In such cases， we must find figure or the main part. As figure refers to objects that are complete， the three principal elements of a sentence structure， which are subject， predicate and object， shall be grasped tightly. In the two sentences above， the main clause， according to Figure-Ground Theory， is “the hotel is an artistic building” and the reason is to meet Mr. Black.
In actual reading， the sentence is much more complex than illustrated. Here is a sentence cited from Reading Course 3， written by Wang Shouren：
（5） Each generation of birds that leave the protection of their parents to become independent have the inborn genetic information that will help them to survive in the outside world and the skills that they have learnt from their parents.
In any complex sentences， modifiers can be removed and have no affection on main clause. Besides， from Figure-Ground Theory perspective， we must extract the core part from a sentence. Due to coherence of figure，the obvious part shall be the rest one after removing subordinate clause. Thus， the above instance may be analyzed as following：
Each generation of birds have the born genetic information and skills （main sentence）. They leave the protection of their parents to become independent. The inborn genetic information will help them to survive in the outside world. They have learnt skills from their parents.
2.2 Analysis of nominal clause
Nominal clause contains four branches which are subjective clause， objective clause， predicative clause， appositive clause. The following part gives them an illustration respectively.
Subjective clause is joined by conjunction“that” and placed before predicate.
（6） That he is dead seems quite certain.
（7） Who has won the prize remains a secret.
In the 6th and 7th examples， “that he is dead” and “who has won the prize” are the most salient part of the sentence， it is taken as figure， and the predicative part is viewed as ground. Usually， in subject clauses， the subjective part is still， coherence and complete so that it is main part and figure.
Objective clause means object is changed in a sentence.
（8） We must be very clearly aware that China is in the primary stage of socialism and will remain so for a long time to come.
As object becomes a sentence， it has complete sentence structure with subject， predicate and object. Objective clause forms a closed state while the other parts of whole sentence are open and missing of object. Thus in the situation， objective clause is taken as figure and other parts are seen as ground. When analyzing the sentence， we should focus on the objective clauses. Predicative clause is same with objective clause as predicative part changes in a clause， so it will not be expounded more.
Appositive clause has equal position with its modified object， which is easily distinguished from main and subordinate clause. So the main clause is figure， for its salience of whole sentence.
2.3 Analysis of adverbial clause
Adverbial clause usually modifies predicate， non-finite， attribute， and even the whole sentence. Attributive Clause can be categorized the usual kinds by functions of time， place， cause， purpose， sequence， concession， manner and so forth. Only Adverbial Clause of time， cause and condition will be analyzed particularly as they are typical and frequently used
2.3.1 Temporal subordinate clause
When the event in subordinate happens prior to the event in main clause， the conjunction “after” is often used； if the event in subordinate clause happens behind that in main clause， they are often connected with “before”.
（9） After grandfather was dead， grandmother was in deep sorrow.
In this sentence， “grandmother was in deep sorrow” is emphasized and also that is what the speaker wants to get across. After all， the first part is just a ground， serving as a foil to the figure， which is the main part. Because of its stationary， the main clause can be in any part of the sentence， not changing its position. So the illustrated sentence above can be written as， “Grandmother was in deep sorrow after grandfather was dead”. However it is not practicable in “before” clauses.
（10） Before I went to the classroom， the light was already on.
（11） The light was already on before I went to the classroom.
In these two sentences， the main part“the light was already on” seems the speaker wants to emphasize and the sequential relation is not changed， actually the emphasized part is different in semantically. And then the figure event is changed. So the figure-ground assignment is different with the employment of different sentence structure.
There are other types of temporal clauses with conjunction when， whenever， while， since， until etc. They form different time sequence as the conjunction “before” dose. Usually， the first part in sight is always the speaker wants to stress so that the main clause and subordinate clause cannot be exchanged， only “after” clause is exceptional.
2.3.2 Reason subordinate clause
Usually， direct reasons， objective reasons and known reasons in sentences have told the listeners the reasons but not an indicative message so that they will not be inferred through logic. The result is that they are not focused while the main clauses are. And yet indirect， subjective and unknown reasons should be center and figure because we are always curious about indistinction and eager to explore it. Exactly， the three types’ reason subordinate clauses explain the confusing result. Based on it， the reason clauses naturally become figure. （12） Because it rained hard， we had to stay at home.—Direct Reason
（13） The phone turned out because it was power off.—Objective Reason
（14） Because you are here， Miss Sophie asks for your help.—Known Reason
（15） Alex fed the puppy， because his sister told me.—Indirect Reason
（16） Joe is in Tokyo， because he rings me from there.—Subjective Reason
（17） Tom got a scar on his face because he was scratched by a cat last night.—Unknown Reason
In the first three， they have one feature in common that is the reason directly causes the fact. We can easily explain them as if it not XX…XX would not happen， So the main clause shall be figure. But the rest three， the reason does not mean it causes the result. And in the last sentence， the scar may be caused by another reason， such as fight. Absolutely， the reason subordinate should be the figure.
2.3.3 Conditional subordinate clause
A conditional sentence conveys two states the speaker want to express. One is the sentence describes a truth， the other is speaker assumes what is said is a truth. The genuine conditional sentence is in an actual mood while the non-genuine one is expressed in subjective mood. Thus the genuine one is salient in main clause and non-genuine one is prominent in subordinate clause.
（18） If you arrive home late， your mother will worry.
（19） If I were not here， I would be happy.
The first sentence tells a truth that mother will worry about her children. Certainly the main clause has to be the figure for it is what the speaker would like to stress. The second is in a subjective mood. It is supposed that the speaker is happy now but truth is not. And only in such condition， that the speaker is in somewhere else， can he or she be happy. The conditional clause is sure to be focus.
3. Conclusion
With the semantic analysis of these sentences based on Figure-Ground Theory， the major findings are concluded： First， the FigureGround Theory in complex sentence is not static， but dynamic. Second， to the same two（or more） events， the Figure-Ground Theory is different with the use of different sentence structure. Third， to some complex sentences， the Figure-Ground Theory may change indifferent context. Fourth， to some complex sentences， the figure part is usually some part of the sentence （the main clause or the subordinate clause）.
Reference
L. G. Alexander. Longman Advanced Grammar[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press， 2001.
Ungerer F. & H. J. Schmid. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press， 2001.
高娟、李安华. Talmy图形背景理论概述[ J ] . 文教资料，2 0 0 8 （ 1 8 ）.
梁丽. 图形-背景理论在句法分析中的作用[ J ] . 华中科技大学学报，2 0 0 5 （ 2 ）：1 1 6 - 1 1 9.
刘潇、李孝奎. 图式理论在翻译中的应用[ J ] . 双语学习，2 0 0 7 （ 5 ）.
刘燕. 英汉复合句语序差异的图形-背景理论阐释[ D ] . 山东大学，2 0 1 0.
王安琪. 英汉复杂句的特征及翻译探讨[ J ] . Magnificent Writing，2 0 1 3 （ 2 5 ）：7 6 - 7 7 .
王守仁. 泛读教程3[ M ] . 上海：上海外语教育出版社，2 0 1 3：6 3 .
[中图分类号]H030
[文献标识码]A
[文章编号]1006-2831（2015）11-0149-5 doi：10.3969/j.issn.1006-2831.2015.04.043
1. Studies of Figure-Ground Theory
Figure-Ground concept was first proposed by Edgar Rubin， a well-known Danish psychologist. His famous Rubin Face/ Vase illusion explains the pair of concepts. After Rubin， psychologists had further studies on the theory and they were convinced that our cognition to objects is always separated in figure and ground. Figure is complete， compared to ground， and people always capture figure in ground. As figure has structure and coherence while ground does not， figure is always inclined to conspicuously lie in front of ground， which causes that we always firstly see and focus on figure.
There are few scholars studying English complex sentence based on Figure-Ground Theory and it is fewer for scholars to do research on words order from figure and ground. Tamly， a linguist， does not study words order directly on Figure-Ground Theory， but he points out that the general law of words order is figure precedes ground. Thus we can infer that Tamly agrees that English complex sentence reflects figure comes before ground. Liu Yan stresses that English complex sentence adopts the cognitive structure from figure to ground， while words order from ground to figure often exits in Chinese sentence. Liang Li has fulfilled her studies on English complex sentence from Figure-Ground segregation to manifest the structure of space and time in language. She found that Figure-Ground Theory has expounded that the application of language is not all ruled by grammatical laws from a new perspective. Actually it is natural related to human’s cognition. 2. Analysis of English complex sentence
An English complex sentence refers to the one， according to L.G. Alexander， that contains a large number of words， phrases， clauses and modifiers to form subordinate parts that are not of equal importance compared with main part， because the main part can often stand on its own even if the extra parts are removed from the whole sentence （Alexander， 2001）.
Complex sentences can be formed with two methods. One is joining subordinate clauses to the main clause with conjunctions. The other is using infinitive or participle constructions. They are non-finite phrases rather than clauses， but they form part of complex sentences because they can be reexpressed as clauses which are subordinate to the main clause.
In a word， a complex sentence must consist of main part and subordinate parts with phrase， non-finite or clauses.
2.1 Analysis of attributive clause
For the attributive clause， English usually puts the subordinate clause after the main clause or the antecedent. It is identified that the attributive clause provides a reference frame and setting or ground information for antecedent， which meanwhile exerts the function of classifying the previous information and providing the basis for the subsequent information. The main clause or antecedent is the focus information； the attributive clause is to modify them. Here comes to a sequence that main clause or antecedent is figure while attributive clause is ground. Take following two sentences as example.
（1） Have you found your book （that） you were looking for yesterday？
（2） This is the house where I was born and brought up.
In the first sentence， that “have you found your book” is complete. There is no missing of subject， predicate and object. It totally is in conformity with the structural laws so it should be the figure and main part. In the second sentence， they seem to be two complete sentences， which are “this is the house” and “I was born and brought up”. Truly， they are independent individuals when they are separated. However， there is an adverb，“where”， and it makes different. As relative adverbs are linked with attributive clause，“where” cannot be omitted. Thus the latter part in second sentence， which is ground， is lack of place so the previous part is figure.
Somehow， the antecedent acts as subject which is surely followed by attributive clause. In such case， attribute can segregate main clause， causing reading difficulties. Such cases often occur in sentences where nouns are subjects. （3） The hotel where we will stay is an artistic building.
（4） The reason why I come here is to meet Mr. Black.
In such cases， we must find figure or the main part. As figure refers to objects that are complete， the three principal elements of a sentence structure， which are subject， predicate and object， shall be grasped tightly. In the two sentences above， the main clause， according to Figure-Ground Theory， is “the hotel is an artistic building” and the reason is to meet Mr. Black.
In actual reading， the sentence is much more complex than illustrated. Here is a sentence cited from Reading Course 3， written by Wang Shouren：
（5） Each generation of birds that leave the protection of their parents to become independent have the inborn genetic information that will help them to survive in the outside world and the skills that they have learnt from their parents.
In any complex sentences， modifiers can be removed and have no affection on main clause. Besides， from Figure-Ground Theory perspective， we must extract the core part from a sentence. Due to coherence of figure，the obvious part shall be the rest one after removing subordinate clause. Thus， the above instance may be analyzed as following：
Each generation of birds have the born genetic information and skills （main sentence）. They leave the protection of their parents to become independent. The inborn genetic information will help them to survive in the outside world. They have learnt skills from their parents.
2.2 Analysis of nominal clause
Nominal clause contains four branches which are subjective clause， objective clause， predicative clause， appositive clause. The following part gives them an illustration respectively.
Subjective clause is joined by conjunction“that” and placed before predicate.
（6） That he is dead seems quite certain.
（7） Who has won the prize remains a secret.
In the 6th and 7th examples， “that he is dead” and “who has won the prize” are the most salient part of the sentence， it is taken as figure， and the predicative part is viewed as ground. Usually， in subject clauses， the subjective part is still， coherence and complete so that it is main part and figure.
Objective clause means object is changed in a sentence.
（8） We must be very clearly aware that China is in the primary stage of socialism and will remain so for a long time to come.
As object becomes a sentence， it has complete sentence structure with subject， predicate and object. Objective clause forms a closed state while the other parts of whole sentence are open and missing of object. Thus in the situation， objective clause is taken as figure and other parts are seen as ground. When analyzing the sentence， we should focus on the objective clauses. Predicative clause is same with objective clause as predicative part changes in a clause， so it will not be expounded more.
Appositive clause has equal position with its modified object， which is easily distinguished from main and subordinate clause. So the main clause is figure， for its salience of whole sentence.
2.3 Analysis of adverbial clause
Adverbial clause usually modifies predicate， non-finite， attribute， and even the whole sentence. Attributive Clause can be categorized the usual kinds by functions of time， place， cause， purpose， sequence， concession， manner and so forth. Only Adverbial Clause of time， cause and condition will be analyzed particularly as they are typical and frequently used
2.3.1 Temporal subordinate clause
When the event in subordinate happens prior to the event in main clause， the conjunction “after” is often used； if the event in subordinate clause happens behind that in main clause， they are often connected with “before”.
（9） After grandfather was dead， grandmother was in deep sorrow.
In this sentence， “grandmother was in deep sorrow” is emphasized and also that is what the speaker wants to get across. After all， the first part is just a ground， serving as a foil to the figure， which is the main part. Because of its stationary， the main clause can be in any part of the sentence， not changing its position. So the illustrated sentence above can be written as， “Grandmother was in deep sorrow after grandfather was dead”. However it is not practicable in “before” clauses.
（10） Before I went to the classroom， the light was already on.
（11） The light was already on before I went to the classroom.
In these two sentences， the main part“the light was already on” seems the speaker wants to emphasize and the sequential relation is not changed， actually the emphasized part is different in semantically. And then the figure event is changed. So the figure-ground assignment is different with the employment of different sentence structure.
There are other types of temporal clauses with conjunction when， whenever， while， since， until etc. They form different time sequence as the conjunction “before” dose. Usually， the first part in sight is always the speaker wants to stress so that the main clause and subordinate clause cannot be exchanged， only “after” clause is exceptional.
2.3.2 Reason subordinate clause
Usually， direct reasons， objective reasons and known reasons in sentences have told the listeners the reasons but not an indicative message so that they will not be inferred through logic. The result is that they are not focused while the main clauses are. And yet indirect， subjective and unknown reasons should be center and figure because we are always curious about indistinction and eager to explore it. Exactly， the three types’ reason subordinate clauses explain the confusing result. Based on it， the reason clauses naturally become figure. （12） Because it rained hard， we had to stay at home.—Direct Reason
（13） The phone turned out because it was power off.—Objective Reason
（14） Because you are here， Miss Sophie asks for your help.—Known Reason
（15） Alex fed the puppy， because his sister told me.—Indirect Reason
（16） Joe is in Tokyo， because he rings me from there.—Subjective Reason
（17） Tom got a scar on his face because he was scratched by a cat last night.—Unknown Reason
In the first three， they have one feature in common that is the reason directly causes the fact. We can easily explain them as if it not XX…XX would not happen， So the main clause shall be figure. But the rest three， the reason does not mean it causes the result. And in the last sentence， the scar may be caused by another reason， such as fight. Absolutely， the reason subordinate should be the figure.
2.3.3 Conditional subordinate clause
A conditional sentence conveys two states the speaker want to express. One is the sentence describes a truth， the other is speaker assumes what is said is a truth. The genuine conditional sentence is in an actual mood while the non-genuine one is expressed in subjective mood. Thus the genuine one is salient in main clause and non-genuine one is prominent in subordinate clause.
（18） If you arrive home late， your mother will worry.
（19） If I were not here， I would be happy.
The first sentence tells a truth that mother will worry about her children. Certainly the main clause has to be the figure for it is what the speaker would like to stress. The second is in a subjective mood. It is supposed that the speaker is happy now but truth is not. And only in such condition， that the speaker is in somewhere else， can he or she be happy. The conditional clause is sure to be focus.
3. Conclusion
With the semantic analysis of these sentences based on Figure-Ground Theory， the major findings are concluded： First， the FigureGround Theory in complex sentence is not static， but dynamic. Second， to the same two（or more） events， the Figure-Ground Theory is different with the use of different sentence structure. Third， to some complex sentences， the Figure-Ground Theory may change indifferent context. Fourth， to some complex sentences， the figure part is usually some part of the sentence （the main clause or the subordinate clause）.
Reference
L. G. Alexander. Longman Advanced Grammar[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press， 2001.
Ungerer F. & H. J. Schmid. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics[M]. Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press， 2001.
高娟、李安华. Talmy图形背景理论概述[ J ] . 文教资料，2 0 0 8 （ 1 8 ）.
梁丽. 图形-背景理论在句法分析中的作用[ J ] . 华中科技大学学报，2 0 0 5 （ 2 ）：1 1 6 - 1 1 9.
刘潇、李孝奎. 图式理论在翻译中的应用[ J ] . 双语学习，2 0 0 7 （ 5 ）.
刘燕. 英汉复合句语序差异的图形-背景理论阐释[ D ] . 山东大学，2 0 1 0.
王安琪. 英汉复杂句的特征及翻译探讨[ J ] . Magnificent Writing，2 0 1 3 （ 2 5 ）：7 6 - 7 7 .
王守仁. 泛读教程3[ M ] . 上海：上海外语教育出版社，2 0 1 3：6 3 .