Mechanism of Naming in Japanese andEnglish : Differences in Constraints on Possille Words

日英命名机制:Possille词约束的差异

基本信息

批准号：
16520239
负责人：
YUMOTO Yoko
金额：
$ 1.67万
依托单位：
Osaka University
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
2004
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2004 至 2007
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

This study has made clear the mechanisms which determine the syntactic feature and the semantic structure of the derived words, in particular, the verbs, adjectives and adjectival nominals that are formed through compounding as well as affixation and conversion in English and Japanese and demonstrated the differences between the two languages as well as those among the syntactic categories.First, as to the verb formation based on a verb, English makes use of a variety of affixation while Japanese is productive in V-V compounding, and besides the morphological differences, there are differences due to the components where they are formed; English affixation occurs exclusively in the lexicon while Japanese V-V compounding can occur both in the lexicon and the syntax. I proposed the theory that explains these differences under the hypothesis of modularity in word formation, whirh was put forth inYumoto (2005).Secondly, I took up the conversion between a noun and a verb in English, and pro … More posed an analysis by means of the Qualia Structure a In Pustejovsky (1995). I assumed that theb Qualia Structure of a base noun should provide the information that would inspire the Lexical Conceptual Structure (LCS) to derive a verb, which would explain the differences in productivity; that is, the nouns that are the names of an instrument have the telic role represented in terms of the LCS so that they derive the verbs most productively without any morphological marker. This analysis was published inYumoto (2007) ((8) in the list).Thirdly, I investigated into the Japanese compound adjectives and adjectival nominals that include the subject of the base. This combination is not accepted in English as is generalized as the First Order Projection Principle by Selkirk (1982). Furthermore, it remained unsolved why the incorporation of the subject into a word can result in a compound that retains the function as a predicator. I proposed the analyses that would explain this problem as well as the differences between English and Jananese one of which was presented in Yumoto (2007) ((9) in the list).To summarize, this study has shown a variety of word formations that are regulated by different modules of grammar which strongly supports the modularity of word formation. English and Japanese make use of different mechanisms of naming new things, events and property, and the principles of the module that regulate each mechanism would properly explain the syntactic feature of a derived word as well as the range of possible words in each language. Less

这项研究清除了句法特征和派生单词的机制，特别是通过复合以及英语和domeshes中的复合和转换形成的副词，并证明了语言之间的ifference作为语法cancoris.firiris.firiris.firs.firs.firs.firs.firs.firs.firs.fircoris.fircoris.fircoris.fircoris.fircoris.formiss.fircoris.forporis.forporis.fircoris.fircoris.fircoris.fircoris.forporis.formes.fircoris.forporis.forporis.fircoris.formist of。动词形成在日语中呈粘连的动词曲线，除了形态学差异之外，由于它们形成了Exicon和语法，因此这些差异证明了这些差异，这些理论是这些差异。单词福特福特福特（Ford Ford）的模块化假设（2005）。概念结构（LC）得出一个动词，这将解释生产力，即仪器的名称的naus在LCS中具有压制的态度，因此它们得出了任何形态上的标记在日本化合物的名义中，对某些主题的组合并不是将主题纳入一个单词的情况下，将其组合成一个化合物会导致我提出的化合物分析将差异作为当前的Diglish和Jananese之一。单词形成