• <progress id="1jjn0"><sub id="1jjn0"><font id="1jjn0"></font></sub></progress>
    <tbody id="1jjn0"><center id="1jjn0"><xmp id="1jjn0"></xmp></center></tbody>
  • <tbody id="1jjn0"><sub id="1jjn0"><xmp id="1jjn0"></xmp></sub></tbody><nav id="1jjn0"></nav><nav id="1jjn0"><font id="1jjn0"><var id="1jjn0"></var></font></nav>
    <var id="1jjn0"><input id="1jjn0"></input></var>
  • <tbody id="1jjn0"><sub id="1jjn0"></sub></tbody>
  • <nav id="1jjn0"><input id="1jjn0"><b id="1jjn0"></b></input></nav><progress id="1jjn0"></progress>
  • <progress id="1jjn0"></progress><progress id="1jjn0"></progress>
    <tbody id="1jjn0"></tbody><var id="1jjn0"></var>
    <var id="1jjn0"><input id="1jjn0"></input></var>


    来源: www.workforlgbt.org 发布时间:2020-03-12 论文字数:30022字
    论文编号: sb2020030321303729740 论文语言:中文 论文类型:硕士毕业论文


    1.1   Orientation of the Research
    Under  the  theoretical  guidance  of  Phase  Theory  proposed  by  Chomsky  (2005)  and some  insights  from  Bo?kovi?  (2005)  in  the  most  recent  Minimalist  Program,  the present  study  seeks  to  shed  light  on  the  constraints  governing  NP  extractions  out  of relative clauses in Mandarin. The purposes of this study lie in several aspects: (i) to render  explicit  the  reasons  why  it  is  often  more  acceptable  to  extract  NPs  from  the subject position than from the object position; (ii) to find out whether the mechanism behind NP extractions out of relative  clauses in  Mandarin is purely syntactic or not; (iii) to illustrate some factors that may suspend the ban of NP extractions
    This chapter serves as a general introduction of the whole thesis and consists of four parts.  Part  One  is  about  orientation  of  the  current  research  and  then  rationale  and significance  are  given  in  Section  1.2.  Besides,  the  research  questions  this  thesis attempts  to  answer  are  introduced  in  Section  1.3.  Finally,  in  Section  1.4,  the  author presents the outline of the whole thesis.

    1.2   Rationale and Significance of the Research
    Issues  about  the  grammaticality  of  NP  extractions  have  long  been  attracting researchers’ attention and much research has been conducted in the relevant field by scholars both at home and abroad. A basic principle regarding NP extractions is called Complex  NP  Constraint,  according  to  which  extraction  from  complex  NPs  is disallowed  where  complex  NP  is  a  noun  modified  by  a  clause  (Ross  1967). Furthermore, it is generally observed that the syntactic component position where the extraction  happens  exerts  an  essential  influence  on  the  grammaticality  of  derived sentences.  That  is  to  say,  there  exists  a  kind  of subject-object  asymmetry  in  English whose main representation consists in wh-movement. As far as English is concerned, when  the  extraction  happens  from  the  object  position,  the  derived  sentence  will sometimes become somehow marginal if not ungrammatical, but it is grammatical in most  cases.  However,  the  picture  for  the  extraction  out  of  the  subject  position  is different because this kind of extraction will definitely result in the ungrammaticality. This interesting contrast can be shown by the following example cited from Li (2000):
    (1) a. I wonder how well John understands this book.
    b. ? This is the booki that I wonder how well John understands ti.
    c. *John is the personi that I wonder how well ti understands this book.  
    Under Chomsky’s GB framework, this contrast can be directly captured. Despite the fact that both (1b) and (1c) violate the Subjacency Condition (SC), which requires that the movement of extracted components cannot cross two bounding nodes (where bounding  nodes  are  NP  and  CP)  (Chomsky,  1986b),  (1b)  is  thought  to  be  more acceptable  than  (1c).  Therefore,  some  other  constraints  also  play  a  role  here.  The reason underlying this contrast is that the trace left by the NP is properly governed in (1b)  but  not  in  (1c).  From  Chomsky’s  point  of  view,  a  trace  should  be  properly governed and he puts  forward two sub-conditions. A trace is properly  governed if it can either be lexical-governed by the predicate verb or be antecedent-governed by its antecedent.  In  (1b),  the  trace  can  get  its  lexical  government  from  the  predicate understands, making this sentence become marginal. Yet, the trace in (1c) can neither be  lexical-governed  by  the  predicate  understands  nor  be  antecedent-governed  by  its antecedent  person  because  of  the  intervening  barrier  how  well,  which  blocks  their antecedent relationship. Besides, the contrast can also be found in logical form.


    2.1   Overview
    As mentioned above, a great number of scholars have noticed the inconsistencies and conducted studies, among which some scholars believe the subject-object asymmetry does exist in Mandarin Chinese while others just hold the opposite opinion. Thus, in the following part  efforts will first be made to summarize the ideas of scholars who are in favor of movement analysis. Then, a brief review of proposals put forward by those who support non-movement analysis will be given.
    Huang  (2009)  also  expresses  his  doubt  on  the  reliability  of  movement  analysis since  it  cannot  give  a  satisfactory  explanation  to  the  subject-object  asymmetry mentioned  in  the  previous  parts.  He  argues  that  when  movement  takes  place  islands conditions  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  No  matter  relative  clause  islands  are formed  in  the  subject  or  object  position,  NPs  extracted  out  both  move  across  two bounding nodes and hence derived sentences are supposed to be ungrammatical. Yet, extractions from the subject positions are sometimes permissible, which suggests that movement  analysis  fails  to  explain  this  contrast.  Attempting  to  cope  with  this challenge,  Xu  (2008)  proposes  that  the  base-generated  positions  of  relativized  NPs depend  on  whether  the  target  of  relativization  can  be  a  topic  in  the  underlying structure. If the NP being extracted can be a topic, it is actually base-generated outside of the island. Otherwise, it can only be generated within the relative clause. Insights of  this  proposal  are  gained  through  the  observation  of  nominal  constructions  in Japanese and Korean. It is generally accepted that Japanese and Korean have double nominative constructions, with the first nominative adjoined to the IP formed by the second nominative NP and the predicate (Kuroda 1987; Yoon 1986; Kim 2001). As a result, the explanation to the subject-object asymmetry comes out naturally. 

    2.2 Non-movement Analysis
    One  of  the  most  influential  representatives  adopting  non-movement  analysis  to  the study of relative clauses is Huang (2009), who attempts to explain the lack of island violations  with  a  universal  account  called  Generalized  Control  Rule  (GCR). According  to  Huang,  there  is  a  base-generated  pro  inside  the  relative  clause,  which should  be  co-indexed  with  the  closest  nominal  element.  Now,  the  contrast  between extractions  from  subject  position  and  those  from  object  position  can  be  captured straightforwardly by the following examples.
    (10) a. [Opi [[proi chuan tj de] yifuj] hen piaoliang de] na-ge reni.
    b. *[Opi [wo xihuan [[proi chuan tj] de] yifuj de]] na-ge reni. 
    When the complex NP is in the subject position, there is a base-generated pro in the embedded clause, whose identification is subject to GCR. Meanwhile, an operator is generated at the edge of the relative clause. Due to the fact that this operator is the most  local  c-commanding  antecedent  for  pro,  this  empty  category  is  properly governed  and  co-indexed  with  the  head  na-ge  ren.  Since  there  is  no  movement,  no bounding node is actually crossed and (10a) is grammatical. However, when it comes to the complex NP located in the object position, the picture is different. In (10b) there is  an  intervening  NP  wo  between  the  operator  and  the  base-generated  pro,  which blocks  their  antecedent  relationship.  Therefore,  pro  cannot  be  identified  with  the operator properly since it can neither be lexical-governed by the predicate chuan nor get  antecedent-government  from  the  operator.  This  leads  to  the  ungrammaticality  of this  sentence.  Since  there  is  no  movement  occurring,  no  actual  extraction  happens either due to the assumption that the NP is located outside the relative clause from the very  beginning.  In  spite  of  the  efficiency  exerted  by  this  non-movement  analysis  in explaining the contrast found between (10a) and (10b), this analysis doesn’t prove to be  unproblematic.  In  the  following  cases,  GCR  makes  wrong  predictions  for  the identification  of  the  base-generated  pro  and  this  is  where  one  major  defect  of  this analysis lies.

    3.1   Overview ........................ 11
    3.2   The Existence of Subject-Object Asymmetry in Mandarin Chinese ........... 11
    CHAPTER FOUR   ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ................................... 25
    4.1   Overview ................................ 25
    4.2   The  Theoretical  Foundation:  Chomsky’s  Phase  Theory  and  Insights from Bo?kovi?’s ..................... 25
    CHAPTER FIVE   CONCLUSION .............................. 39
    5.1   Overview ..................................... 39
    5.2   Major Findings .......................... 39


    4.1   Overview
    In  this  chapter,  the  author  sets  out  to  deal  with  the  subject-object  asymmetry  of  NP extraction  from  relative  clauses  in  Mandarin  Chinese.  Firstly,  the  theoretical foundation  of  the  author’s  account,  a  combination  of  Chomsky’s  phase  theory  and Bo?kovi?’s, is introduced in Section 4.2, including a short comparison made between the  two  and  a  proposal  that  DP  should  be  conceived  as  a  phase  under  some circumstances. Next, a presentation of the preliminary version of author’s account is given in Section 4.3, where the author endeavors to prove that the background/focus factor  matters  in  the  formation  of  phasehood  (Goldberg  2006,  Jia  2017).  Thirdly,  in Section  4.4,  another  factor  called  theta-marking  is  taken  into  consideration  and  the combination of these two factors is the final version of the author’s account. Finally, the author briefly summarizes the current study’s main arguments in Section 4.5. 


    5.1   Overview
    This  chapter  generally  serves  as  a  brief  summary  of  the  whole  study,  in  which  the author re-states the research goals and research questions, presents the major findings and lists some limitations as well. 
    As introduced in Chapter One, the current study concerned with NP extractions from relative  clauses  in  Mandarin  Chinese  endeavors  to  render  explicit  the  mechanism behind  the  subject-object  asymmetry  existing  in  this  syntactic  operation.  The  main purposes  of  this  study  consist  in  the  following  aspects:  i.  to  prove  the  existence  of subject-object  asymmetry  in  Mandarin  Chinese  and  introduce  its  manifestation  with regard to component extractions; ii. to explain why it is more permissible to extract an NP from a relative clause formed at the subject position than the object position; iii. to list the factors that may affect the grammaticality of component extractions. Above all, the  author  makes  a  review  of  previous  studies  concerning  the  syntactic  operations inside relative clauses in Mandarin Chinese and finds that they are conducted within two main theoretical foundations, that is movement analysis  and GCR analysis. The former  group  of  scholars  claims  that  movement  actually  happens  and  Subjacency should be taken into consideration. Besides, when a relativized NP can be the topic of the whole sentence in the underlying structure, this NP is actually located outside the relative  clause  and  thus  the  extraction  crosses  only  one  bounding  node.  Since  it  is possible  for  the  relativized  NP  to  be  a  topic  only  when  the  relative  clause  island  is located  in  the  subject-modifying  position,  the  later  extraction  is  grammatical.