国产精品麻豆欧美日韩ww_欧美日高清视频_亚洲精品成人久久久_久久精品国产清自在天天线

打印本文 打印本文  關閉窗口 關閉窗口  
淺談as和than引導的分句定位及主語省略問題(下)
作者:倪肖丁  文章來源:本站原創  點擊數  更新時間:2018-02-01  文章錄入:admin  責任編輯:admin

asthan從句中也存在這種現象。但定語從句(以下均改稱關系分句)則不然,無論是傳統語法還是當代語法,理論上都不支持類似省略。試比較:

He bought the same shoes as recommended by his coach the other day.()

He bought the same shoes that /which recommended by his coach the other day.(誤)

We were provided with more money than necessary.(正)

We were provided with enough money that/which necessary.()

They claimed it as a deductible expense, as permitted under US tax law. ()

They claimed it as a deductible expense, which permitted under US tax law.(誤)

He wrote more books in English than in German. ()

He bought some books that/which in German. (誤)

另外,asthan從句可有倒裝現象,但關系分句不可能。例如:

He was a devout Catholic, as were both his brothers. ()

He was a devout Catholic, which were both his brothers (too). (誤)

因為關系分句主謂不能倒裝,故上述誤句可改為正常語序如下:

He was a devout Catholic, which both his brothers weretoo()

上述各組第一句中的省略或倒裝現象正是從屬連詞引導分句所具有的特征,但關系分句中卻是不允許的(CGEL- Chapter 13)。這反過來證明:存在省略或主謂倒裝現象的asthan從句不是關系分句,而是比較分句。

其次,如果認為asthan引導的是關系分句,而同時又具有比較意義。從語用學角度看,這不符合邏輯。因為關系代詞指代的就是先行詞,兩者是同一體,比較無效。只有不同的人物或事物才可以進行共同點和不同點的比較。例如:

a. He phoned home every day, as he'd promised to do.

b. He phoned home every day, which he'd promised to do.

a句中,主句He phoned home every day是實際發生的事,設為X;從句he'd promised to do是他答應要做的事,設為Y。經過比較,兩件事情一致。故X=Y

b句中,主句He phoned home every day為實際發生的事情,設為X;從句的which指的就是主句的He phoned home every day,仍然是XX=X邏輯不通,兩者為同一體,無法比較。

因此,CGEL認為以上兩結構存在語義和句法上的差別:a句包含比較分句;b句包含關系分句。

1.3 比較分句的歸屬

關于asthan引導的分句的名稱和歸屬,學者們的意見并不完全統一。但總體上講,公認asthan引導的是比較從句(Comparative clauses),其中包括國內傳統語法中所謂的方式狀語從句。

CGOEL對于脫離the same…, so…,as…such…語境的as從句有不同的分類。例如:

I'm working the night shift, as you know.

CGOEL將上述as從句歸入評注性分句(Comment clauses);LGSWE則稱之為態度分句,都是狀語從句的一種。前者同時也承認,此時的as就功能而言與句子性關系代詞which有相似性。國內章振邦等學者也認同此觀點。這種帶有不確定性的論述一方面表明學者們對這種用法的as如何定位仍在探索,另一方面也給分句類別的界定增添更多的復雜性。鑒此,本人傾向于CGEL的觀點,將此類asthan分句均納入比較分句的范疇。

但與國內傳統語法體系不同的是,在當代英語語法體系中比較分句(Comparative clauses)本身并不屬于狀語分句的范疇,而是從屬分句的一個單獨類別。國內學者章振邦等則將其納入修飾語的范疇。

本人認為把比較分句從狀語分句中分離出來是合理的,畢竟很難把比較分句(像時間狀語從句,條件狀語從句等一樣)視為謂語的修飾成分。但這種分類對于非研究者來說并不很重要,即使仍按傳統方法將其歸入狀語從句也并非不可。

由于比較分句本身具有復雜性,可按不同相似性分為若干小類,這對于解釋比較分句的倒裝和省略現象是有實際意義的。但因與本文主題關系不大,宜另文再議。

上一頁  [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]  下一頁

打印本文 打印本文  關閉窗口 關閉窗口