從詞彙動貌看Te形子句事象與主句事象之間的語意關係

渡邊（1990, 1994）的論文從＜詞彙動貌＞的觀點提出＜Te形子句＞具有固有的意義與功能。渡邊（1990, 1994）認為：＜Te形子句＞具有「在前件事象已實現的認知基礎上，表達後件事象」的意義，並且＜Te形子句＞的述語動詞是否在詞彙動貌上屬於＜限界（telic）動詞＞會關係到＜Te形子句＞和＜主句＞之間的語意關係的解釋，並把這個說明擴展到出現於補助動詞前面或出現於句尾的＜Te形子句＞。本文的目的則是，探討渡邊（1990, 1994說明中的優點與缺點。渡邊（1990, 1994）的說明無法涵蓋＜Te形子句＞和＜主句＞表達的所有語意關係，也難以適用到＜活動動詞＞、＜達成動詞＞、＜瞬間動詞＞、＜狀態動詞＞、＜形容詞＞、＜形容名詞＞、＜名詞述語＞等所形成的＜Te形子句＞。＜Te形子句＞與＜主句＞事象之間的語意關係，決定性因素並不只在＜Te形子句＞的詞彙動貌，而是在＜主句＞的詞彙動貌以及＜Te形子句事象＞的全盤性意義來決定的。本文提出的條理化是「包含＜Te形子句＞在內的句子是以＜前件事象＞的＜既存＞為前提的，來敘述＜後件事象＞之＜成立＞的」。依照此規定，能夠包括性與統一性地說明＜Te形子句事象＞與＜主句事象＞之間出現的各式各樣的語意關係。

關鍵字

Te形子句；詞彙動貌；限界動詞；非限界動詞；語意功能

並列摘要

In the present paper, we try to investigate Watanabe's (1990, 1994) theory, which clarifies the peculiar semantic functions of the te-clause from the viewpoint of verb's ”lexical aspect,” as well as examine the merits and demerits of the theory. Watanabe (1990, 1994) considers that ”a te-clause contains the meaning of conveying the consequent eventuality based on the acknowledgement of the realization of the antecedent eventuality,” and that the semantic relationship between the te-clause and the main clause is deeply involved with whether or not the predicate verb in the te-clause is a ”telic verb.” Moreover, this exposition is applied to the te-clause preceding a subsidiary verb as well as the te-clause appearing at the end of a sentence. However, this explanation cannot account for all types of relationships between the te-clause and the main clause, nor can it apply to all types of te-forms of ”activity verbs,” ”accomplishment verbs,” ”achievement verbs,” ”stative verbs, adjectives,” ”adjectival nouns” and ”nouns.” The semantic relationship between the eventuality of the te-clause and the main clause is determined not only by the ”lexical aspect” of the te-clause, but also by the ”lexical aspect” of the main clause, as well as by the overall meanings of the ”te-clause's eventuality” and the ”main clause's eventuality.”In this paper, we propose the generalization that ”a sentence which contains a te-clause states the 'establishment of the consequent eventuality' on condition of the 'existence of the antecedent eventuality''” Under these circumstances, a comprehensive and overall explanation of various semantic relationships between the ”te-clause's eventuality” and the ”main clause's eventuality is attainable.