【摘要】：本文分別從語義、句法和語用三個平面對“本來”和“原來”進(jìn)行了全面系統(tǒng)地考察。既描寫了它們的個性特征,也對比了它們的相似之處。在本體研究的基礎(chǔ)上,我們還描寫了留學(xué)生習(xí)得這對近義詞時所出現(xiàn)的偏誤類型,并分析導(dǎo)致偏誤的原因。 包括緒論和結(jié)語在內(nèi),全文一共分為六個部分。 緒論：介紹了本文的研究意義,總結(jié)了已有的相關(guān)研究成果,并交代了本文的語料來源及采用的研究方法。 第一章：從語義角度考察“本來”和“原來”。首先從語義特征的角度分別分析了作定語的“本來”和“原來”,通過比較,發(fā)現(xiàn)兩個詞在語義特征上存在差異。作定語的“本來”具有[+內(nèi)指性],[+連續(xù)性],[+表時性]的隱性語義特征,而作定語的“原來”則只有[+表時性]的隱性語義特征。最后分析了“本來副”和“原來副”的語義背景。我們把副詞“本來”按義項分為“本來副1”、“本來副2”和“本來副3”,對它們的語義背景逐個進(jìn)行分析。對于“原來副”,我們探尋出它在實際語用中的完整式和簡約式。盡管“本來副,”和“原來名”的語義相似,但它們在以下三方面存在語義差異：事物前后有無變化,時問跨度長短,語義側(cè)重點。 第二章：系統(tǒng)考察了“本來”和“原來”的句法結(jié)構(gòu)。首先歸納了作定語的“本來”和“原來”的中心語類型,發(fā)現(xiàn)它們與中心語的匹配能力存在差異,“本來”的中心語絕大多數(shù)是抽象名詞,而“原來”所能修飾的中心語呈多樣化。對于“本來副”,我們還是分義項逐個對它的句法特征進(jìn)行了全面的描寫。對于“原來副”,我們分別從它與其它類副詞的共現(xiàn),它與語氣副詞的共現(xiàn)兩個方面去描述“原來”的句法特征,發(fā)現(xiàn)副詞“原來”在語序上優(yōu)于絕大部分的其它類副詞和語氣副詞。最后還描述了作狀語的“本來副1”與“原來名”的句法差異。 第三章：探討了副詞“本來”和“原來”的語用及篇章功能,我們認(rèn)為在語用上,它們都具有強(qiáng)調(diào)突出和指明預(yù)設(shè)的功能。在篇章連接上,它們都有解說釋義和間隔反復(fù)的銜接功能。 第四章：通過對外國留學(xué)生進(jìn)行問卷調(diào)查及搜索HSK動態(tài)語料庫,統(tǒng)計出留學(xué)生在“本來”和“原來”上的偏誤率,我們發(fā)現(xiàn),留學(xué)生在語序方面的偏誤率相對較低,但是由于他們對兩個詞的義項及句法特征把握不清而出現(xiàn)的偏誤相對較多。我們對所掌握的語料進(jìn)行了歸納,總結(jié)出三類偏誤類型：誤用,錯序及遺漏,并對引起偏誤的原因進(jìn)行了簡要分析。 結(jié)語：對全文的主要結(jié)論做了回顧和總結(jié)。
[Abstract]:This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic study of "original" and "original" from three aspects of semantics, syntax and pragmatics. They describe both their personality characteristics and their similarities. On the basis of ontological study, we also describe the types of errors that occur in the acquisition of the synonyms by foreign students, and analyze the causes of the errors. Including the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into six parts. Introduction: this paper introduces the significance of the research, summarizes the existing research results, and describes the source of the corpus and the research methods adopted in this paper. Chapter one: from the semantic point of view, "original" and "original". First of all, this paper analyzes the "original" and "original" of attributive words from the point of view of semantic features, and finds that there are differences in semantic features between the two words by comparison. The attributive "original" has the implicit semantic features of "implicity", "continuity" and "chronicity", while the attributive "original" has only the implicit semantic characteristics of "tabular temporal". Finally, it analyzes the semantic background of "original accessory" and "original accessory". We divide the adverbs "original" into "original accessory 1", "original accessory 2" and "original accessory 3" according to their meanings, and analyze their semantic background one by one. With regard to "original accessory", we explore its complete and minimalist forms in practical pragmatics. Although the semantics of "original accessory," and "original name" are similar, they have semantic differences in the following three aspects: whether things change before and after, the length of time span, and the semantic focus. Chapter two: the syntactic structure of "original" and "original" are systematically investigated. Firstly, the author summarizes the types of "original" and "original" as attributive words, and finds that there are differences in their matching ability with the central language. Most of the "original" central words are abstract nouns. The "original" can be modified by a variety of central words. For the original accessory, we describe its syntactic features one by one. For "original adverb", we describe the syntactic characteristics of "original" from its co-occurrence with other adverbs and the co-occurrence of modal adverbs. It is found that the adverb "original" is superior to most other kinds of adverbs and mood adverbs in word order. In the end, the syntactic differences between the adverbial "original adverbial 1" and "original name" are described. The third chapter discusses the pragmatic and textual functions of adverbs "original" and "original". We think that they all have the functions of highlighting and indicating presupposition in pragmatics. In the connection of the text, they all have the function of explaining the meaning and interlocking repeatedly. Chapter four: through the questionnaire survey to the foreign students and searching the HSK dynamic corpus, we find that the error rate of the foreign students in the word order is relatively low, and the error rate of the foreign students in the "original" and the "original" is found to be relatively low. However, because they do not understand the meanings and syntactic features of the two words, there are relatively many errors. We sum up three types of errors: misuse, order and omission, and briefly analyze the causes of errors. Conclusion: the main conclusions of the paper are reviewed and summarized.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：H195

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 邵演艷;“原來”與“本來”的多角度辨析[D];上海師范大學(xué);2013年

2 宋美花;漢韓確信類語氣副詞對比研究[D];延邊大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：2366428