中文雙鑲嵌關係子句中主語、賓語不對稱性之研究

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	陳祉諭 Chen, Tzu-Yu
論文名稱：	中文雙鑲嵌關係子句中主語、賓語不對稱性之研究 An empirical study of subject-object asymmetry in Mandarin Chinese doubly-embedded relative clauses
指導教授：	蘇宜青 Su, Yi-Ching
口試委員:	許淳潔 Hsu, Chun-Chieh 周昭廷 Chou, Chao-Ting
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	人文社會學院 - 語言學研究所 Institute of Linguistics
論文出版年：	2019
畢業學年度：	107
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	104
中文關鍵詞：	中文雙嵌式關係子句、、主語和賓語不對稱性、孤島效應
外文關鍵詞：	Chinese doubly-extracted relative clauses, the subject-object asymmetry, The Complex NP Constraint
相關次數：	點閱：2 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

Huang (1984) 針對中文中的孤島效應，提出了主語和賓語不對稱的現象，在中文中，只有關係子位於主要子句主語位置時，詞組的移出可以跳脫孤島效應的限制。若從主要子句賓語位置中移出，則無法跳脫孤島效應的限制。繼Huang(1984) 的研究後， Li(2002)，測試了中文雙鑲嵌關係子句，也在其中發現主語和賓語的不一致性。然而， Hsu (2008)對於Li(2002)研究中的雙鑲嵌是關係子句型，提出了質疑，因同樣由主語移位的關係子句，也有不合語法的情形發生，所以需要相關的實驗來驗證。
此研究擬探討雙嵌式關係子句是否具有主語和賓語移位的不對稱性，有鑑於Hsu(2008)和Li(2002)，對於雙嵌式關係子句中，不一致的結果，而採用語句接受度測驗及自我閱讀監控測試(self-paced reading)來驗證。
實驗一及實驗二，使用語句接受度測試，測試Li(2002) 所提出的假設，主語從關係子句內移出所形成的雙崁式關係子句或位於主語的位置，能逃離孤島效應的限制，反之，賓語從關係子句內移出或位於賓語的位置，則仍受孤島效應的限制，將會造成接受度極低的句子。但兩個實驗在語句接受度上，均未顯示主語和賓語的不一致性。
接續實驗二，實驗三採用自我閱讀監控測試(self-paced reading)來測試實驗一的句子，主語移出的關係子句較賓語移出的句子而言，閱讀的時間比較少。
實驗四，針對Hsu (2008)所提出的假設，認為謂語的語意特性，能影響主語移出的雙崁式關係子句，若謂語為狀態性表示，如:漂亮、可愛、大方，則主語移出，能逃離孤島效應的限制，反之，若謂語為非狀態詞，如:跌倒，則仍受孤島效應限制。結果顯示謂語為狀態詞有助於語句訊息的處理。

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate whether there is the subject-object asymmetry in Mandarin Chinese doubly-embedded relative clauses. Huang (1984) found the subject-object asymmetry for the Complex NP Constraints in Chinese. Any movement out of matrix subject escapes the restriction of the Complex NP Constraints. Following Huang (1984), Li’s (2002) study found similar subject-object asymmetry patterns existing in Chinese doubly-embedded relative clauses. However, both Su et al. (2017) and Hsu (2008) found inconsistent results contrast to the findings of Huang (1984) and Li (2002). Therefore, an empirical study was needed.
Experiment 1 and Experiment 2 adopted the acceptability judgement experiments to test the claims proposed by Li (2002) which suggested subject extraction can escape from the Complex NP Constraint. Experiment 1 investigated the RCs with extraction located at either the matrix subject or the matrix object. Experiment 2 tested the RCs with either a subject or an object doubly extracted. The findings of the two experiments indicated that no subject-object asymmetry in Mandarin Chinese doubly-extracted relative clauses.
As a follow-up experiment of Experiment 2, Experiment 3 adopted the self-paced reading test to examine the processing of the sentences used in Experiment 2. The results showed that the RCs with subjects doubly-extracted were processed faster than the RCs with object doubly-extracted.
Experiment 4 investigated whether semantic factors had impacts on processing of subject doubly-extracted RCs. The results showed that the RCs with the stative predicates were read faster than its counterpart with non-stative predicates.

Abstract......................................I
Acknowledgement ...............................III
Table of Contents ..............................IV
Chapter 1........................................1
1 The four types of islands ...................1
2 Problems regarding Subject-object Asymmetry of Complex NP Constraints in Mandarin Chinese ….................8
3 The Organization of the Thesis................10
Chapter 2 The escapable Complex NP Constraints: the subject-object asymmetry regarding CNPC in Mandarin Chinese .....12
1 Background ....................................12
2 The escapable Complex NP Constraints in Mandarin Chinese...13
2.1 The account with a based-generated pro ..................14
2.2 An account involving Movement ....................17
Chapter 3 Previous studies .....................................23
1 Offline studies ............................................23
1.1 Su et al. (2017)..........................................23
1.2 Ko (2007) ................................................25
2 Online processing studies ................................. 27
2.1 Polinsky et al. (2013) ...................................27
2.2 Aldwayan et al. (2010)................................... 28
2.3 Cunnings et al. (2010) .................................. 29
3 Research Questions .........................................29
Chapter 4 Experiment 1..........................................31
1 Motivation..................................................31
2 Methods ....................................................34
2.1 Participants .............................................34
2.2 Materials ................................................35
2.3 Procedure ................................................36
3 Results.....................................................37
4 Discussion..................................................39
Chapter 5 Experiment 2 & 3 .................................... 40
1 Experiment 2: the offline acceptability judgement study.... 40
1.1 Motivation................................................40
1.2 Methods ................................................. 45
1.2.1 Participants ...................................45
1.2.2 Material .......................................45
1.2.3 Procedure ..................................... 46
1.3 Results ..................................................47
1.4 Discussion ...............................................49
2 Experiment 3: the self-paced reading study..................49
2.1 Motivation ........................................49
2.1.2 Offline acceptability judgment test: the
summary of Experiment 2............................50
2.1.3 Prediction..................................52
2.2 Methods .......................................... 54
2.2.1 Material ...................................54
2.2.2 Participants................................55
2.2.3 Procedure ..................................56
2.3 Results ...........................................57
2.3.1 Accuracy of comprehension questions ........57
2.3.2 Mean reading time in milliseconds ..........59
2.4 Discussion ....................................... 65
Chapter 6 Experiment 4..........................................70
1 Motivation..................................................70
1.2 Prediction......................................................74
2 Method .....................................................74
2.1 Materials ................................................74
2.2 Participants ............................................ 75
2.3 Procedure ................................................76
3 Results ....................................................76
4 Discussion .................................................81
Chapter 7 General Discussion and Conclusion ....................85
1 Revisiting research questions ..............................85
2 The Summary of Experimental Results ........................85
3 General Discussion ........................................ 87
4 Some Theoretical Implications ..............................88
5 Conclusion .................................................88
Reference ......................................................90
Appendix A .....................................................92
Appendix B .....................................................97
Appendix C ....................................................102


                                

Aldwayan, Saad, Robert Fiorentino & Alison Gabriele. 2010. Evidence of syntactic constraints in the processing of wh-movement. Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Ed. Bill VanPatten, and Jill Jegerski, John Benjamins. 65-86. Publishing Company.
Bach, Emmon, Colin Brown & William Marslen-wilson. 1986. Crossed and nested dependencies in German and Dutch: A psycholinguistic study. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1.4, 249-262.
Cunnings, Ian, Claire Batterham, Claudia Felser & Harald Clahsen. 2010. Constraints on L2 learners’ processing of wh-dependencies. Research in Second Language Processing and Parsing. Ed. Bill VanPatten, and Jill Jegerski, John Benjamins. 65-86. Publishing Company, 2010.
Du, Pei-fen. 2013. Internal and External Factors in the Processing of Chinese Relative Clauses. Chiayi: National Chung Cheng University. MA Thesis.
Gibson, Edward. 2000. The Distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. Image, language, brain. Ed. Alec Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita, Wayne O'Neil. 95-121. MIT Press.
Gibson, Edward and H.-H. Iris Wu. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context. Language and Cognitive Processes.28.1 125-155.
Gibson, E., Desmet, T., Grodner, D., Watson, D., & Ko, K. 2005. Reading relative clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics, 16, 313-354.
Han, Chung-hye, and Jong-Bok Kim. 2004. Are there “Double Relative Clauses” In Korean? Linguistic Inquiry 35.2: 315-357.
Hsu, Chun-Chieh and Hsieh, Ching-Yu. 2013. The effects of syntactic knowledge and extra-grammatical factors on sentence acceptability judgement: An empirical study on Chinese topic construction. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 11.1:91-124.
Hsu, Chun-Chieh. 2008. Revisit Relative Clause Islands in Chinese. Language and Linguistics 9.1 24-48.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1982. Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar. Cambridge: MIT dissertation.
Huang, C.-T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry. 15.4: 531-537.
Li, Charles N. 1940- : Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar / Charles N. Li and Sandra A. Thompson. Taiwan: Crane Pub., 2009.
Li, Y.-H. Audrey. 2002. Word order, Structure, and relativization. On the Formal Way to Chinese Languages. Ed. Sze-Wing Tang & Cheng-Sheng Luther Liu. 45-73. Stanford: CSLI.
Lin, C.-J. C., & Bever, T. G. 2007. Processing doubly-embedded head-final relative clauses. Poster presented at Interdisciplinary Approaches to Relative Clauses (REL07), Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.
Phillips, Colin. 2013. On the nature of island constraints I: Language processing and reductionist accounts. Experimental Syntax and Island Effects. Ed. Jon Sprouse and Horbert Hornsterin. 64-108. Cambridge Press.
Polinsky, Maria, Carlos G. Gallo, Peter Graff, Ekaterina Kravtchenko, Adam Milton Morgan & Anne Sturgeon. 2013. Subject islands are different. Experimental Syntax and Island Effects. Ed. Jon Sprouse and Horbert Hornsterin. 286-309. Cambridge Press.
Ross, John Robert. 1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Cambridge: MIT dissertation.
Kanako, Ikeda and Kyoko Yamakushi. 2017. The acquisition of the argument/ adjunct wh-asymmetry and the Complex NP constraint in Japanese. Paper presented at the ICTEAP 2017 workshop in Hong Kong.
Ko, Yuguang. 2007. Grammaticality and Parsability in Mandarin Chinese Syntactic Judgement Experiment. Chiayi: National Chung Cheng University. MA Thesis.
Su, Yi-ching, Chen Tzu-Yu and Tuan, Yu-Rou. 2017. An Empirical Evaluation on the Subject/Object Asymmetry of Chinese Complex NP Island. Paper presented at the ICTEAP 2017 workshop in Hong Kong.
Tsai, Wei-Tien Dylan. 1997. On the absence of island effects. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series 27.1:125-149.
Wu, F., Kaiser, E. and Arderson E. (2012). Animacy effects in Chinese relative clause processing. Language and Cognitive Processes 27.10: 1489-1524
Yao, Shuiying. Stage/Individual-level Predicates, Topics and Indefinite Subjects. Paper presented at PACLIC 24 Proceeding.
.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文