• <tr id='nF0RSw'><strong id='nF0RSw'></strong><small id='nF0RSw'></small><button id='nF0RSw'></button><li id='nF0RSw'><noscript id='nF0RSw'><big id='nF0RSw'></big><dt id='nF0RSw'></dt></noscript></li></tr><ol id='nF0RSw'><option id='nF0RSw'><table id='nF0RSw'><blockquote id='nF0RSw'><tbody id='nF0RSw'></tbody></blockquote></table></option></ol><u id='nF0RSw'></u><kbd id='nF0RSw'><kbd id='nF0RSw'></kbd></kbd>

    <code id='nF0RSw'><strong id='nF0RSw'></strong></code>

    <fieldset id='nF0RSw'></fieldset>
          <span id='nF0RSw'></span>

              <ins id='nF0RSw'></ins>
              <acronym id='nF0RSw'><em id='nF0RSw'></em><td id='nF0RSw'><div id='nF0RSw'></div></td></acronym><address id='nF0RSw'><big id='nF0RSw'><big id='nF0RSw'></big><legend id='nF0RSw'></legend></big></address>

              <i id='nF0RSw'><div id='nF0RSw'><ins id='nF0RSw'></ins></div></i>
              <i id='nF0RSw'></i>
            1. <dl id='nF0RSw'></dl>
              1. <blockquote id='nF0RSw'><q id='nF0RSw'><noscript id='nF0RSw'></noscript><dt id='nF0RSw'></dt></q></blockquote><noframes id='nF0RSw'><i id='nF0RSw'></i>


                作者:???? 日期:2019-05-10

                主講:何萬順 (臺灣政治大學語言學研究所 特聘教授)

                題目Unifying Sortal Classifiers and Plural Markers: A Case Study of Chinese and English



                主持:羅瓊鵬 (南京大學文ω 學院 副教授)


                  何萬順教授1978年畢業於臺灣東海大胞磷胆碱钠胶囊學,獲得英語文學學士學位,1990年畢業於美國▓夏威夷大學,獲得語言學博士學位。何萬順复方感冒灵颗粒教授歷任臺灣政治大學語言學研究所助理教授、副教授、教授、兼任所長等職務,現任該所特聘教授(2008至今)。何萬申万盛利精选順教授主要研究漢語句法學、語言類型學等。近年來主要非布丙醇软胶囊關註自然語言數詞系統的語法。曾在Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, SyntaxLinguisticsLinguaLanguage and Linguistics等知名■刊物上發表論文多篇。他還是Taiwan Journal of Linguistics(臺灣語言學ぷ刊)的↙創刊主編之一。


                  The conventioanl view is that sortal classifiers (CL) serve the function of categorization, while plural markers (PM) mark plurality. In this talk I explore the dissenting view that the two can be unified under one category, which predicts their complementary distribution (Greenberg 1990, Borer 2005, Borer & Ouwayda 2010), with a focus on Chinese and English. A mathematical foundation is provided, i.e., CL and PM function similarly as a multiplicand, or more accurately ×1, e.g., san ge pingguo (3 CL apple) = three apple-s = [3×1APPLE] (Her 2012a). This predicts that languages with overt CL/PM should have numerals with a multiplicative base, e.g., [3×102], san-bai in Chinese and three hundred in English. Having confirmed this as a statistical implicational universal, we then investigate CL/PM’s complementary distribution in NP. By cross-referencing Gil’s (2013) database of classifier languages and Haspelmath’s (2013) database on plural-marking languages, 22 languages have both CL and PM; among them, 10 allow CL/PM co-occurrence in NP and thus present potential counterevidence. We contend that two kinds of PMs should be recognized: morphosyntactic vs. morphosemantic. Morphosyntactic PMs engage in number agreement with the predicate, but morphosemantic PMs do not. As expected, none of the 10 languages has morphosyntactic PMs. For the unification of CL and morphosyntactic PM, we propose an abstract morpheme /×1/ in Chinese and English, and their difference is parameterized in terms of the allomorph selection strategy: a meaning-based strategy in Chinese vs. a sound-based strategy in English.

                主辦:澳门新濠天地  南京大學人文基金