言語学について
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。
System for organizing grammatical relations
In order to insightfully discuss systems of grammatical relations within a clause, it is convenient to identify three basic "semantico-syntactic roles" termed S, A and O.
Similar terms are used by Comrie and Silverstein.
These terms assume two prototypical clause types.
The S is defined as the only nominal argument of a single-argument clause.
This quite different from the S used by Greeberg in his characterization of constituent order typology, as discussed in chapter 7, or the S used in earlier versions of generative grammar to refer to the highest node in constituent structure.
While the term S often reminds us of the grammatical relation subject, S as used in this chapter refers informally to the "Single" argument of a single-argument clause.
Sometimes this type of clause is referred to as INTRANSITIVE clause.
The A is defined as the most AGENT-like argument of a multi-argument clause.
Sometimes this type of clause is referred to as a TRANSITIVE clause.
If there is no argument that is a very good agent, the A is the argument that is treated morphosyntactically in the same manner as prototypical agents are treated.
Usually there will be one argument in every verbal clause that exhibits this property, though there may not be.More complex systems are described below.
O is the most PATIENT-like argument of a multi-argument clause (see chapter 4).
While the term O often reminds us of the grammatical relation "object", O refers informally to the "Other" argument of a multi-argument clause.
Again, if none of the arguments is very much like a PATIENT, then the argument that is treated like a prototype patient is considered to be the O.
In this schema, the grammatical relation of SUBJECT can be defined universally(fo all languages, rather than for one particular language) as S together with A, while DIRECT OBJECT, or simply "object" can be defined as O alone.
Some languages pay more grammatical attention to these notions than do others.
In the following extended discussion, we will discuss the various morphosyntactic systems for expressing S, A and O.
Languages may treat S and A the same morphosyntactically, and O differently.
The following English examples illustrate this system with pronominal case forms-one form, "he" is used for third-person singular masculine pronouns in both the S and the A roles.
A different form, "him", is used for third-person masculine singular pronouns in the O role.
The extended circle around S and A in this diagram indicates that S and A are treated by the grammar of English as "the same", as demonstrated by the subject properties discuss above (use of the subject case form, "he", in 24, immediately before the verb).
The distinct circle around O indicates that O is treated differently, insofar as a different pronominal form, "him", is used to refer to it.
"Him" also appears in a different position in the clause, namely after the verb.
This system is often referred to as a NOMINATIVE／ACCUSATIVE system.
The morphosyntactic grouping of S and A together can be called the NOMINATIVE case, while the distinct morphosyntactic treatment of the O role is the ACCUSATIVE case.
The Quechuan languages (a group of languages spoken throughout the Andes mountains in South America) employ the same arrangement.
However, in addition to pronominal forms and constituent order, the Quecha languages express this system in morphological case marking on free noun phrases.
In the following examples from Huallaga Quechua the same case marker 0(zero), occurs on noun phrases in both the S and A roles.
A dis tinct case marker, "-ta", occurs on noun phrases in the O role (all Quechua examples courtesy of David Weber, p.c.)
お礼
たいへん丁寧にお答えいただきありがとうございました。 おかげさまでよく理解することができました。 ありがとうございました。