噶瑪蘭語否定詞之句法研究

Negation in Kavalan: A Syntactic Study

葉俞廷(Yu-Ting Yeh)

指導教授 ： 宋麗梅

國立臺灣大學/文學院/語言學研究所/碩士(2005年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2005.00034

摘要

摘要

本研究旨在管束句法學的理論架構下探討噶瑪蘭的否定詞，並回答以下問題：(1)每個否定詞的詞類為何？ (2)每個否定詞在句法結構上的位置為何？是否對應到NegP？ 若有，NegP 的位置為何？ (3)這些否定詞相互之間的結構高低為何？

本論主要分成兩部份。第一部份描述七個噶瑪蘭否定詞（mai、usa、naRin、sukaw、Ringu、taqa及 ita）的語意特性及句法分佈。第二部份則根據構詞特性、與其他成分的關係及時態、動貌、代名詞分佈的現象，進一步分析每個否定詞的詞類及句法結構。其相對結構高低也在第二部份中討論。

分析結果顯示，否定陳述句的mai及否定祈使句中的naRin應屬於否定助動詞，而否定等同句中的usa則歸類為否定繫動詞。這三個否定詞都對應到NegP（而NegP位於TP及AgrP之間），並有阻止V往上移至T或Asp的功能；於是否定詞本身會取代動詞上移承接時態或動貌詞素。

另一方面，否定所有句或存在句中的mai、sukaw、Ringu及taqa皆屬於否定動詞，除了本身帶有否定語意之外，與一般動詞無異。因此，這四個否定詞在句法結構上皆位於V而非Neg；換言之，其所對應的句型結構並不需要NegP的存在，是以雖然它們表達否定語意，卻不屬於否定句型。最後，ita歸類為否定質詞，因其用法固定不變

最後，本研究也針對噶瑪蘭語及其他南島語的主要否定詞之形式，提供類型學上的比較。

關鍵字

否定 ； 詞類 ； 助動詞 ； 動詞 ； 質詞 ； 句法結構 ； NegP ； 噶瑪蘭語

並列摘要

Abstract

This thesis attempts to examine the negation in Kavalan within the framework of Government and Binding Theory and address the following questions: (a) What are the categorial statuses of the negative elements in Kavalan? (b) Where are their structural positions? Do they correspond to a NegP projection? If they do, where should the NegP be projected? (c) What is the structural hierarchy of these negative elements?
This study is primarily composed of two parts. The first part includes a descriptive discussion of the semantic properties and syntactic distributions of seven negative elements in Kavalan (mai, usa, naRin, sukaw, Rayngu, taqa, and ita). In the second part, the syntactic categories of these negative elements and the structures of the corresponding constructions are analyzed, in view of their morphological behaviors, their relationship with the following constituents/verbs, as well as the distribution of tense/aspect inflections and bound pronouns. The relative hierarchy of these negative elements is also discussed in the second part.
The results demonstrate that mai in declaratives and naRin in imperatives belong to negative auxiliary verbs while usa in equational sentences should be classified as negative copula. Each of these three negative elements heads a NegP between TP and AgrP and functions as a potential intervening head that blocks V from head-moving to T (or Asp). The Neg head instead moves upwards itself to pick up the tense/aspect inflections.
On the other hand, mai in possessives/existentials, sukaw, Rayngu, and taqa are categorized as negative verbs that are not any different from common positive lexical verbs except for their inherent negative feature. Consequently, they are structurally located as V heads which regularly undergo head-movement to pick up agreement, tense, and/or aspect morphemes. Since there is no need to project an additional NegP for the corresponding constructions, they cannot be called negative constructions though they indeed express negative meanings. Finally, ita is viewed as a negative particle due to its frozen expression.
In addition to a conclusion, the last chapter provides a typological comparison regarding the realization of main negators (i.e., mai, usa, naRin) in Kavalan and other Austronesian languages.

並列關鍵字

Negation ； Category ； Auxiliary ； Lexical Verb ； Particle ； Phrase Structure ； NegP ； Kavalan

參考文獻

Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2002. Negation in non-standard British English. London; New York: Routledge.

Becker, Misha. 2004. Is isn’t be. Lingua 114.4: 399-418.

Belletti, A. 1990. Generalized Verb Movement. Turin: Rosenberg and Tellier.

Bernini, Giuliano and Paolo Ramat. 1996. Negative Sentences in the Languages of Europe: A Typological Approach. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Blust, Robert. 2002. Notes on the history of ‘focus’ in Austronesian languages. The History and Typology of Western Austronesian Voice Systems, ed. by Fay Wouk and Malcolm Ross, 63-78. Canberra, Australia: Pacific Linguistics.