言語学について

質問

言語学の専門書を読んでいるのですが、いまひとつ内容が掴めません。
できればパラグラフ毎の要約を教えてください。
よろしくお願いします。

Ditransitive Clauses

Ditransitive clauses have to argument constituents in the verb phrase.
The first noun phrase immediately following the verb normally refers to a living creature, the second to something nonliving.
We'll describe here the two major classes of ditransitive clause.
"Goal ditransitive clauses" have immediately following the verb an object noun phrase with the goal role.
This object is called the "indirect object":

・・・

The second object argument is assigned the theme role.
For most sentences like these, there are counterparts in which the first object has switched places with the second object must be introduced by the preposition "to".
The noun phrase that was the indirect object is now the object of a prepositional phase headed by the preposition "to".
Lool at these examples:

・・・

These noun phrases are no longer indirect objects of the verbs but instead are objects of the preposition "to".
However, they are still arguments in their clause and cannot be omitted unless the context makes their mention unnecessary.
We referred earlier to such noun phrases as oblique arguments, abbreviating the term as OBL-to.
Some goal ditransitive clauses are idioms.
These typically have "give" as their predicate, but allow other predicates such as "show" and "sell".
Examples are "give the house a coat of paint, give the child a scolding, give the school a bad reputation, show the visitors a good time"(meaning "arrange for visitors to enjoy themselves"), and "sell them a bill of goods"(meaning "deceive them").
These have no counterparts with the goal proposition following "to".
The same is true when the direct object is a clause rather than a noun phrase, as in these next examples:

・・・

There are no grammatical counterparts with "to":

・・・

The second class of ditransitive clause, "benefactive ditransitive clauses", contains predicates which assign the thematic role benefactive to the second object.
In such clauses the second object, which is called the "benefactive object", refers to who the action was done "for" rather than who is was done "to".
Not surprisingly, the preposition counterpart uses "for" rather than "to" before the oblique object:

・・・

There are, in addition to the two major classes of ditransitive clauses, clauses that cannot be so neatly classified because of special properties of their verbs.
for instance, ditransitive clauses, it has no counterpart with a preposition:

・・・

The verb "cost" is also unusual in that it has no passive counterpart:

You may be cost a lot of money (by that party).

Other ditransitive do have passive counterparts:

Angelica was told (by them) to arrive early for the award.
The club was baked a guava-chiffon cake (by　Craig).

Since the verb may have two objects, we might expect there to be passive counterparts.
After all, the object of a transitive clause is the unit that functions as suject for the counterpart passive clause.
Two objects in the active voice should correspond to two subjects in the passive voice.
but this is not the case.
Only the noun phrase that functions as the first object (i.e., as the indirect object) can be subject of a passive counterpart.
Following is an active voice example along with two candidates for its passive counterpart:

The group awarded the college two special scholarships.
The college was awarded two special scholarships (by the group).
Two special scholarships were awarded the college (by the group).

Actually, the noun phrase "two special scholarships" can be the subject of a passive, but only in the counterparts of the examples with "to":

Two special scholarships will be awarded to the college (by the group).

回答No.1

noname#202629

Ditransitive clauses have to argument constituents in the verb phrase.
The first noun phrase immediately following the verb normally refers to a living creature, the second to something nonliving.
We'll describe here the two major classes of ditransitive clause.
日本の文法解釈では
S+V+O＋O
としているが、この解説は
O＋Oを取ることができる動詞と言う考えで文法もしくは言語を説明している。

"Goal ditransitive clauses" have immediately following the verb an object noun phrase with the goal role.
This object is called the "indirect object":

"Goal ditransitive clauses" と”goal role”
日本語で広く伝わった共通解釈はまだされていないと思う。そのままにするか、カタガナで表現するか、日本語の造語を作る以外はなさそうです。
動詞＋O＋Oの場合の
最初のOを"indirect object"間接目的語と称する。

The second object argument is assigned the theme role.
言語学ではargument を”項”と称しているようで、 second object argumentは動詞＋O＋Oの2番目のOを示し、第二目的語項（私の造語です）とでも言うと思いますが、それがtheme roleに従属するとこの作者は言っているようです。
すると goal roleは第一目的語項になりThe first object argument、又の名を"indirect object"間接目的語となる。
goal role　=　The first object argument　=　indirect object
theme role　=　The second object argument　=　direct object
の図式ができると考えられる。

For most sentences like these, there are counterparts in which the first object has switched places with the second object must be introduced by the preposition "to".
The noun phrase that was the indirect object is now the object of a prepositional phase headed by the preposition "to".
Lool at these examples:

”give”はO+Oを持つことの出来る動詞なので、例えば、
i give her a car.
とした場合に、
I give a car to her.
と置き換えた文章を作ったときの話をしているはずです。

此処まででご勘弁をお願いします。
尚、当方は言語学とは無縁の者ですので詳細についての知識はありません。