透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.226.141.207
  • 學位論文

泰雅語施用結構之研究

Applicative Constructions in Atayal

指導教授 : 蔡維天

摘要


本篇論文旨在討論泰雅語中的兩種施用詞組,確立施用結構在句法上的高低位置以及論元結構的安排。 事實上,在台灣南島語和菲律賓類型的語言中,語態構詞本身就包含論元的引介與選擇受事者為主語(或焦點)的功能;而Shibatani (2005)也觀察到部分南島語言中施用標記有逐漸和語態構詞分工的現象;這些都暗示我們有必要考慮施用詞組的地位。Rackowski (2002)就採用施用結構來重析Tagalog 的論元結構,但他是在語態之下另外假設一個沒有語音形式的施用中心語以及其投射,而將語態分析成是反應論元位置的格位對協;但是我發現這樣的看法無法解釋泰雅語的現象,有些語態的確容許原本應該提升至主語位置的對應論元留在直接賓語的位置─即典型非典論元所出現的位置。另一方面,基於語態之間有許多功能、語意以及構詞句法上的不對稱,我嘗試重新劃分傳統上四分的語態系統,將語態詞綴和施用標記分開,認為二分的語態系統比較合適(參見Starosta 1986, Ross 2006 and Wu 2007),即分成主事語態與受事語態兩大類,在受事語態之下則有兩種施用標記,分別是-an (即原本的PV)和s(i)- (即原本的I/BV)。 奠基於前人對施用結構的研究(尤其Marantz 1993, Pylkkänen 2002 and McGinnis 2001),我認為這這兩種施用標記在句法上有各自或高或低的投射,分別反映在它們所引介的論元角色,以及論元在事件層次上的分派。施用標記除了引介動詞論元結構之外的非典論元,還可以幫忙引介論元結構中所需的必要論元,這也是Pylkkänen (2002)所謂高階施用詞組與低階施用詞組的差別。 以施用標記-an為中心語的施用詞組可有三層不同的位置:最低的一層位於動詞組之下,用以引介雙賓句式的來源/目地論元,或是存在句中的處所論元;最高的一層位於輕動詞組之上,引介事件發生的地點、受事件影響的蒙受者,或心理層面的感知者。並且可能還有一層居中的施用詞組,引介既與論旨/受事有關又涉及事件層次的「持有蒙受者」。另一方面,以施用標記s(i)-為中心語的施用詞組目前結果也得到至少有兩層高低的分別:較低的一層是引介雙賓句或使動處所句中的「位移論旨」,但和施用標記-an為中心語的低階施用詞組不同,雖然同樣引介雙賓動詞的論元,前者語意為AT,而後者為HAVE;較高的一層能引介的論元相當豐富,包括工具、受惠者、蒙受者和原因等等,這些論元的區別則是由謂語類型以及使事性來決定。 研究結果發現,雖然兩個施用詞組都有自己各自的階層分佈,但是-an在低階的論元較為豐富,而s(i)-偏向引介非典論元。施用結構的建立,為泰雅語中論元和語態的對應關係提供一個較完善的解釋並減輕語態的負擔。

並列摘要


This thesis aims to provide an explanation for the mapping between arguments and voice markers of Atayal from a stance of the applicative structure. In Formosan and Philippine-type languages, it is believed that some voices in their function combine applicativization and undergoer selection effect. Besides, Shibatani (2005) observes that the applicatives decouple from the voice morphology in Austronesian. However, I find that the Rackowski’s (2002) pioneering work of Tagalog applicative structure, which still treats voice affixes as equally case agreements on the verb, cannot reflect the fact of Atayal that subject raising does not all conform to the voice morphology. Here I look into Atayal, and suggest a dichotomy between voice and applicative heads for the former voice affixes. Based on both functional and morphosyntactic asymmetries among the four voice affixes of Atayal─AV, PV, LV and I/BV, they are reanalyzed as two voices─AV on one hand and NAV with two applicative heads on the other (Starosta 1986, Ross 2006 and Wu 2007). The two applicative heads recognized in this study are the suffix -an and the prefix s(i)-. Following the research on the applicative structure (Marantz 1993, Pylkkänen 2002 and McGinnis 2001 among others), I further identify different projections for the two applicatives in terms of their semantic and syntactic restrictions. The applicative structures can lighten the burden of voices and reconcile the argument configurations. The applicative head -an has three different projections. The low one is merged below VP, which complements the argument structure of the verb by introducing goal/source or location. The high one is merged above vP, which relates location/goal, affectee or percept to the event of the verb. In particular, the middle applicative head –an is hypothesized when the “possessor affectee” involving both the event itself and the inner of the event is discovered. On the other hand, the applicative head s(i)- has two projections at least. The ‘transported theme’ sports the lower applicative head s(i)-, and the low applicatives s(i)- and –an parallel a dative alternation. In addition, a variety of thematic roles (including instrument, beneficiary/malefactor, affectee and reason etc.), determined by predicate type and agentivity, dominates the high applicative s(i)-. The study shows that the applicative -an and s(i)- have their own spectrum respectively but divide the labors of (extra-)argumentality into two directions─-an is lower and s(i)- is higher.

參考文獻


Yeh, Marie M. 2003. A syntactic and semantic study of Saisiyat verbs. Ph.D. Dissertation, Graduate Institute of English, National Taiwan Normal University.
order, case, and theta-agreement in Mayrinax Atayal), in the Proceeding of the
Huang, Shuanfan and Huang, Huei-ju. 2005. Causative and applicative: their split and syncretism in Formosan languages. Paper presented at the Taiwan-Japan Workshop on Austronesian Languages, June 24-25, Taipei.
Ross, Malcolm D. and Teng, Stacy Fang-ching. 2005. Formosan languages and linguistic typology. Language and Linguistics, 6:739-781.
Ross, Malcolm D. 2002. The history and transitivity of Western Austronesian voice and voice marking. In F. Wouk and M.D. Ross eds., 17-62.

延伸閱讀


國際替代計量