Dissertation > Excellent graduate degree dissertation topics show

The Treatment of De-Constructions as Generalized Quantifiers

Author: YangNing
Tutor: FangLi
School: Beijing Language and Culture University
Course: Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
Keywords: const noun Chinese Language Chinese Zhu Dexi Semantic Kluwer Peking University Press What have
CLC: H313.1
Type: Master's thesis
Year: 2000
Downloads: 161
Quote: 0
Read: Download Dissertation

Abstract

This thesis makes an attempt to treat de-constructions as NPs in the Chinese language on the basis of Generalized Quantifier Theoiy developed in the framework of Barwise & Cooper (1981). Two main aspects of DNP, the formation and the quantification of DNP, are investigated. The body of the thesis consists of the following four sections: Section I. Traditional accounts of DNPs in the Chinese language Section II. The account of DNPs in this paper Section III. The treatment of DNPs as DGQs Section IV. Conclusion In section one, we review the traditional accounts of DNP by answering two questions: a. What are DNPs? b. Are DNPs elliptical constructions? Thu Dexi抯 arguments (1961) on the relevant issues are introduced and questioned in this section. Zhu argued that 揹e?in 揵ai de?things whose color is white) is the same with 揹e?in 揵ai de zhi?sheets of white papers), the combination of the adjective 揵ai?with 揹e?in these two phrases can form a DNP. Thu made a distinction between descriptive and classifying adjectives. The former cannot combine with 揹e?to produce a DNP, while the latter can. Verbs are classified according to the number of arguments they can take. An n-argument verb can form a DNP with 揹e? and the number of the arguments the verb takes in the DNP is n-i, the missing-argument being DNP itself Zhu didn抰 define adjectives of description and classification. Moreover, Zhu抯 rule of combing VP with 揹e?to form DNP is too 3 powerful. Zhu rejected DNPs as elliptical constructions, but his explanation was not adequate in the description of these constructions. In section two, we give our own account of DNP by answering the same two questions mentioned above. To answer the first question, we define DNPs in type-theoretical terms. The logic type for 揹e?in DNPs is different from that in NPs with attributive modifiers. 揵ai de?in 揵ai de zhi? therefore, should not count as a DNP. The logic type for 揹e?in DNP shows that 揹e?is an operator to map a set of entities to a set of properties. Three phrasal categories are investigated in their combination with 揹e?to form DNPs. They are noun phrase, adjectival phrase and verb phrase. Rules are formulated on the availability for the combination of a phrase or a clause with 揹e?to form DNPs. We also look at a lot of controversial data and give an account of a number of remaining problems mentioned in the previous sections using the rules worked out in this section. The second question is related to the treatment of DNPs as non-elliptical-constructions. This question can be easily answered if DNPs are treated as a set of properties while adjectival phrases are not. In section three, we treat DNPs as Generalized Quantifiers. As full NPs are taken as (Det+NP), generalized quantifiers correspond to full NPs rather than determiners, thus differing from the treatment of quantifiers in standard logic. Noun phrases are regarded as sets of sets in GQT. Naturally DNP should be within the extension of generalized quantifiers. This section starts with a review of Frege抯 treatment of quantified sentences, the related topics in standard logic, in GQT and the ideas of Partee(1987) In exploring generalized quantifiers theory, Barwise&Cooper proposed the NP-Quantifier Universal bec

Related Dissertations

CLC: > Language, writing > FOREIGN > English > Semantics,vocabulary,semantic > Basic vocabulary
© 2012 www.DissertationTopic.Net Mobile