The syntax of nominal copular clauses: theoretical and empirical perspectives

名词系动词从句的语法：理论和实证视角

• 批准号: AH/Y007492/1
• 负责人: Caroline Heycock
• 金额: $ 45.49万
• 依托单位: University of Edinburgh
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2024
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2024 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FY007492%2F1
• 关键词: syntax; nominal; copular; clauses; theoretical

One fundamental aspect of language is that sentences are composed of a subject and a predicate. In the best understood cases, the predicate is built around a verb, like "teach", as in (1a) 'My cousin teaches.' But predicates can also be built around nouns, like "teacher", as in (1b) `My cousin is a teacher.' The copula "be" that English requires here is absent in some other languages: semantically the predicate in the "nominal copular clause" (1b) is `a teacher'. The properties of nominal copular clauses are a long-standing issue for linguistics and philosophy: this project aims to address the challenging and potentially revealing questions posed by such clauses through systematic and detailed cross-linguistic investigation into their syntax and semantics, broadening the empirical landscape beyond well-studied languages to less studied ones. Issues that will be investigated include those in (I)-(III): (I) How many structurally different kinds of nominal copular clauses do languages use? If we start from the traditional distinction between predicative examples like (1b) above and `identity statements' like (2) 'Stephen King is Richard Bachman.' (has the same meaning as 'Richard Bachman is Stephen King')how do we analyse examples like (3) 'In the dark, I thought your aunt was you!' (does not have the same meaning as `In the dark, I thought you were your aunt')which also involve two individuals - like the `identity statement' in (2) - but change their meaning if reversed? Is it just a coincidence that some languages use the same copula in all these cases - and others - or are some of them in fact structurally identical despite differences in meaning? Given that identity is a quintessentially symmetric relation in logic, why is its expression in language typically asymmetric? (II) Is the structure of noun phrase predicates different from the structure of noun phrases in their other uses? What does the answer tell us about how the meaning of complex expressions is built up from their parts? (III) Nominal copular sentences are unusual in that the second noun phrase can have some unexpected subject properties. For example, in some languages the typical subject position is taken by the first noun phrase, but the verb agrees with the second, which also has the case for a subject. So, while in Present Day English we say `The problem is me' and not `The problem am I', in German the situation is the reverse (only the equivalent of the second version is acceptable). These "edge cases" allow us to refine and test competing hypotheses about the nature of fundamental processes like agreement and case-assignment. Where documentation is lacking for relevant languages, online questionnaires will be used to elicit data in carefully constructed experiments that will extend the range of detailed information available about predication in a broader range of languages than is typically available. In addition to the empirical and analytical work done within the project, it will also contribute to future crosslinguistic work by producing and disseminating a detailed framework for eliciting data on copular constructions designed for use by researchers working with less well documented languages.

语言的一个基本方面是句子由主语和谓语组成。在最容易理解的情况下，谓语是围绕动词构建的，例如“teach”，如 (1a)“My 表弟教”。但谓语也可以围绕名词构建，例如“老师”，如 (1b)“我的表弟是老师”。英语所要求的系动词“be”在其他一些语言中是不存在的：从语义上讲，“名义系动词从句”(1b) 中的谓语是“一位教师”。名词系动词从句的属性是语言学和哲学中一个长期存在的问题：该项目旨在通过对其句法和语义进行系统而详细的跨语言研究来解决此类从句所提出的具有挑战性和潜在启发性的问题，从而拓宽实证视野除了被充分研究的语言之外，还包括被研究得较少的语言。将要研究的问题包括（一）-（三）中的问题：（一）语言使用了多少种结构上不同的名义系动词从句？如果我们从上面（1b）这样的谓词示例与（2）“斯蒂芬·金是理查德·巴赫曼”这样的“身份陈述”之间的传统区别开始。 （与“理查德·巴赫曼是斯蒂芬·金”的含义相同）我们如何分析像（3）“在黑暗中，我以为你的阿姨是你！”这样的例子（与“在黑暗中，我以为你是你阿姨”的含义不同）这也涉及两个人 - 就像（2）中的“身份声明” - 但如果颠倒过来，它们的含义会改变吗？有些语言在所有这些情况下都使用相同的系动词，这只是巧合吗？还是其中一些语言实际上在结构上相同，尽管含义不同？既然同一性在逻辑上是一种典型的对称关系，为什么它在语言中的表达通常是不对称的呢？ (II) 名词短语谓语的结构与其他用途的名词短语的结构是否不同？关于复杂表达式的含义是如何从其各个部分构建出来的，答案告诉我们什么？ (III) 名词性系动词句子很不寻常，因为第二个名词短语可能具有一些意想不到的主语属性。例如，在某些语言中，典型的主语位置由第一个名词短语占据，但动词与第二个短语一致，这也有主语的情况。因此，虽然在现代英语中我们说“问题是我”而不是“问题是我”，但在德语中情况恰恰相反（只有第二个版本的等效内容是可以接受的）。这些“边缘案例”使我们能够完善和测试有关协议和案例分配等基本流程性质的竞争假设。如果缺乏相关语言的文档，则将使用在线调查问卷来在精心构建的实验中获取数据，这些实验将以比通常可用的更广泛的语言扩展有关预测的可用详细信息的范围。除了在该项目中完成的实证和分析工作之外，它还将通过制作和传播一个详细的框架来获取有关共通结构的数据，该框架旨在供使用记录较少的语言的研究人员使用，从而为未来的跨语言工作做出贡献。