A Case Study on Spatial and Possessive Transfer in Chinese

[[abstract]]本論文旨在探討漢語裡表示空間與屬有關係轉移的句法結構。 如果代表轉移關係的結構是從辭彙裡投影出來，屬有或空間轉移事件的關係，便可由論元結構預測得知。 根據Harley (2003)的看法，動詞不同的論元結構可以決定空間或屬有關係的轉移。 Rappaport Hovav and Levin (2005)提及多義動詞在同一種論元結構中可以同時表述空間與屬有關係的轉移。Kiparsky (1997)採用Hale and Keyser (1992)的中心符合及終端符合兩個假說來支持其所提出空間與屬有關係的差別，來自於動詞所投射出的不同論元結構。既然決定空間與屬有轉移關係的不是動詞本身語義，藉由研究表示轉移關係的句法元素，將有助於了解動詞的論元結構。 本文研究著重於雙賓動詞和名源動詞兩類。分析結果把這些動詞分為三類：第一類僅表示屬有轉移關係，第二類僅表示空間轉移關係，第三類根據其不同的論元結構而可以有兩種不同的轉移關係。此外，客體的成功轉移和間接賓語的有生特性是決定雙賓語結構帶有屬有轉移關係的重要因素。[[abstract]]This thesis aims at finding out how events of possessive and spatial transfers are encoded in Mandarin Chinese, supposing that construction representing transferring relationship is projected from the lexicon and hence predictable from the argument structure. According to Harley’s (2003) claim that different argument structures of verbs determine each distinct transfer, ditransitive verbs do not express ambiguously as Rappaport Hovav and Levin (2005) propose. In Kiparsky (1997), it is argued that location and possession have completely distinct semantic schemata based on Hale and Keyser’s (1992) proposal of central coincidence and terminal coincidence. In this research we argue that argument structures can distinguish the possessive and spatial transfers. Having studied on ditransitive verbs and denominal verbs in Chinese, we conclude that these verbs can be classified to three types: one expresses only spatial transfer; another only possessive transfer; still another can have different argument structures corresponding to types of transfers. The successful transfer and the animacy of the goal-denoting argument are proved to be decisive factors on the possessive transfer in the double object construction.[[note]]碩