发表于2024-12-28
Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书
图书标签: 语言学 语法 汉语 句法 PhD Linguistics Chinese
This classic study in theoretical and Chinese syntax has proven influential in recent developments of syntactic theory in areas as diverse as phrase structure, quantifier scope, anaphora, movement constraints, the form and meaning of interrogative sentences, and the nature of Logical Form. Huang gives a derailed analysis of a wide range of grammatical constructions in Chinese (and English) and shows that his analyses shed important new light on the theory of Universal Grammar and linguistic typology, often in ways unavailable from the study of English and other familiar European languages. Some of the results of this work are: (a) a parametric theory of quantifier scope; (b) a relativized notion of a 'governing category' for Chomsky's (1981) binding theory; (c) a theory of generalized control that derives the pro drop parameter and related phenomena; (d) a proposed Condition on Extraction Domains (CED) on overt movement; (e) a proposal of LF wh-movement for languages without wh-movement; and (f) a generalization of the ECP to account for a full range of adjunct/ complement asymmetries and subject/object asymmetries in syntactic and LF extraction. The proposed analyses exemplify how an optimal theory of typology should come about as the 'by-product' of an optimal theory of UG.
【GB时代】 用中英文phrase condition的区别解释中英文在QP歧义上的区别;用AGR的缺失解释中文何以具有(至少部分)符合GCR的pro;用“了”"着""在"的实词性论证中文的Infl具有proper govern之能力,进而解释主语和宾语为何不(像英语一样)因ECP而显示不对称性... Chapter 6.3之后未阅
评分【GB时代】 用中英文phrase condition的区别解释中英文在QP歧义上的区别;用AGR的缺失解释中文何以具有(至少部分)符合GCR的pro;用“了”"着""在"的实词性论证中文的Infl具有proper govern之能力,进而解释主语和宾语为何不(像英语一样)因ECP而显示不对称性... Chapter 6.3之后未阅
评分【GB时代】 用中英文phrase condition的区别解释中英文在QP歧义上的区别;用AGR的缺失解释中文何以具有(至少部分)符合GCR的pro;用“了”"着""在"的实词性论证中文的Infl具有proper govern之能力,进而解释主语和宾语为何不(像英语一样)因ECP而显示不对称性... Chapter 6.3之后未阅
评分【GB时代】 用中英文phrase condition的区别解释中英文在QP歧义上的区别;用AGR的缺失解释中文何以具有(至少部分)符合GCR的pro;用“了”"着""在"的实词性论证中文的Infl具有proper govern之能力,进而解释主语和宾语为何不(像英语一样)因ECP而显示不对称性... Chapter 6.3之后未阅
评分【GB时代】 用中英文phrase condition的区别解释中英文在QP歧义上的区别;用AGR的缺失解释中文何以具有(至少部分)符合GCR的pro;用“了”"着""在"的实词性论证中文的Infl具有proper govern之能力,进而解释主语和宾语为何不(像英语一样)因ECP而显示不对称性... Chapter 6.3之后未阅
Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书