Recent studies of Japanese clausal comparatives have yielded several competing theoretical views of their syntax and semantics that have different implications for the issue of crosslinguistic ...variation in comparative constructions. This paper aims at contributing to this debate by offering a novel syntactic analysis of Japanese clausal comparatives. The main proposal is that despite their appearance, Japanese clausal comparatives involve a nominal structure whose nominal head is deleted by a syntactic deletion operation, and therefore are underlyingly phrasal comparatives. It is demonstrated that this analysis explains peculiar syntactic and semantic properties of Japanese (seemingly) clausal comparatives, some of which have been unidentified in the previous literature. The proposed account also allows us to dispense with the previously proposed semantic variation specific to degree constructions, and entertain a more conservative view of crosslinguistic variation where the differences between Japanese-type and English-type comparative constructions are solely attributed to their morphosyntactic properties.
One of the components of the grammatical structure of the art text - comparative construction - is considered. The authors believe that through the analysis of the comparisons it is possible to ...comprehend the peculiarities of the worldview and language of the writer. The research urgency is caused by the fact that the study of grammar in the cognitive aspect is based on the anthropocentric direction of modern linguistics. The novelty lies in the combination of structural-semantic and cognitive methods of analysis of language units with the aim of reconstructing the author’s consciousness. The definitions for the components of the structure of comparative constructions are given. Comparative constructions selected by continuous sampling from Esenin’s “small” poems and his poem “Pugachev” are comprehensively considered: from the point of view of formal-semantic organization, as a means of organizing the artistic image and in the light of the theory of conceptual metaphor. Structural-semantic classification of comparative constructions are developed. In addition, they are seen as a means of creating a syncretic art image. In this case attention is paid to their relationship with such tropes, as metaphor, metamorphosis, impersonation. The result of the cognitive analysis the field-target and area-sources of all selected comparative constructions are described. The study reveals the dominances of Esenin’s author consciousness and traces their change.
Рассматриваются способы выражения сравнений в творчестве Юрия Полякова. Определяются морфолого-синтаксические особенности сравнений и их функции в художественном тексте. Выделяются сравнения, ...оформленные с помощью союзов как, словно, будто, точно, а также другими средствами связи: с помощью особых форм существительных (родительного и творительного падежа), других частей речи (предлогов, прилагательных, причастий, наречий). Рассматриваются сравнения, представляющие собой предикативные и непредикативные синтаксические конструкции. Определяются преимущественные формы сравнений в творчестве Ю. Полякова и особенности их использования автором.
Comparison is a fundamental aspect of human cognition that is expressed in various ways across languages. However, it cannot be solely described by individual words or morphemes; rather, its ...existence depends on underlying schematic structures. Heine (1997) notes that the domain of comparison encompasses different conceptual and linguistic forms, with the "superior comparative" serving as a prototypical example in languages worldwide. It is worth noting that both "superior comparative" and "superlative" constructions share common underlying structures. This study hypothesizes that Persian exhibits a greater variety of language-specific superlative constructions compared to English, attributed to typological features such as the "Ezafe construction," "free word order," as well as other morpho-syntactic elements including constructional idioms, specific lexical items, and phrasal/complex predicates unique to Persian.This study aims to address the following questions: 1) What schemas and morpho-syntactic mechanisms do Persian and English employ to express the superlative comparison notion? 2) Do all constructive components of superlative comparison in Persian and English require obligatory or optional formal expression? 3) To what extent can Stassen's typological classification (1985) and Heine's cognitive approach (1997) explain the superlative comparative constructions in these two languages? 4) How similar or different are the dedicated grammaticalized constructions employed by Persian and English to express the superlative comparison notion?
Parallelism between targets in a comparative structure is not always respected in some comparative standards in Japanese that allow the conceptual expansion of their referents, e.g., Nihon-no ...jinkoo-wa kankoku-yori ooi (The population of Japan is larger than Korea). We would like to investigate the conditions under which conceptual expansion is permitted. In contrast to Japanese, the standard of comparison in English adheres to the constraint of parallelism, (e.g., The population of Japan is larger than *(that of) Korea.) and other European languages follow suit. There seems to be a typological difference between Japanese and English, and the key to understanding this lies in the positioning of the mandatory morpheme designating the concept of comparison. After discussing conceptual expansion in comparative contexts, I then move on to more general situations, and consider the availability of conceptual expansion with reference to the central/peripheral distinction of participants involved in an event. We shall see that the breaking of the parallelism constraint in Japanese comparative sentences is the result of conceptual expansion meeting general constraints on its occurrence.
The English comparative correlative construction (e.g., The more you eat, the fatter you get) embeds like an ordinary CP, and each of its clauses displays an ordinary long-distance dependency. ...However, the connection between the two clauses is not ordinary: they are connected paratactically in syntax, but the first clause is interpreted as if it were a subordinate clause. The construction's mixture of the general and the idiosyncratic at all levels of detail challenges the distinction between "core" and "periphery" in grammar and the assumption that some level of underlying syntax directly mirrors semantic structure.
歷史文獻中的差比句可以大略分為甲、乙、丙三型，本文以甲型句（「X＋W＋B＋Y」，亦即「主體項＋述語＋比較詞＋基準項」，下準此）和乙型句（「X＋B＋Y＋W」）間的興替問題作為探討的重點。以下幾點是本文的主要結論：一，雖然甲型句有逐漸為乙型句取代之勢，但這種演變並不是不可違抗的。二，一個漢語方言如果有甲型句轉為乙型句的趨勢，其下屬的各句型未必一定會全部轉類。三，上古漢語的「X＋W＋於＋Y」差比句在近代漢語時期由「X＋W＋如/似＋Y」所取代，和介詞「於」的多義性以及「X＋W＋於＋Y」在句法上的限制是密切相關的。四，「X＋W＋如/似＋Y」本是平比句，在近代漢語時期通過「如」的音變而轉為差比句, In ancient Chinese, comparative constructions could be divided into three types: type A can be formulated as “X+W+B+Y”, type B as “X+B+Y+W”, and type C as “X+W+Y”. In these three patterns X indicates subject, Y standard, W comparative predicate, and B comparative marker. This study mainly investigates the development of type A and its interaction with type B. The conclusions of this paper are as follows: (1) While generally type B has been gradually replacing type A, there still appear to be dialects resisting this tendency. (2) When the replacement of type A by type B does take place, each subtype of A has not also necessarily changed. (3) “X+W+YU 於+Y”, an Old Chinese form of type A, has been replaced by “X+W+RU 如/SI 似
本文詳盡描寫了明代差比句的使用情況，並聯繫清代以後差比句的情況進行討論，指出明代還是兩種詞序類型的差比句共存時期，從明到清，“比＂字句從比人、比事物，到比事件、比動作，功能逐步擴展，而“如/似＂字句則慢慢退出了差比句系統。同時，我們也考察了“比＂字句在現代漢語方言中的分布，指出“比＂字句在現代漢語北方官話方言中的擴散模式和歷史文獻所反映的進程是一致的，而它在南方方言中的擴散模式則與此不同。我們將對這些現象和規律作出解釋, In the Ming Dynasty there were two types of comparative construction characterized by different word order: the bi-construction and ru(si)-construction. From the Ming Dynasty to the Qing the function of the bi-construction gradually expanded until it eventually became dominant in the northern Chinese dialects, while in the south the diffusion of the bi-construction shows a somewhat different process at work.
Most English grammars and textbooks for English as a second or foreign language state that in comparative constructions, the subject pronoun is required after the conjunctions "than" and "as". I ...determined to investigate if this rule holds true in conversational English among native English speakers. My field research indicated that the rule is freely disregarded and that where the subject pronoun is prescribed, the object pronoun is commonly used.
PDF
