英汉语中非宾格现象之认知构式角度探索
|
摘要
语言学界对非宾格现象的研究始于上个世纪70年代末关系语法提出的“非宾格假说”,这一假说后来被吸纳到乔姆斯基创建的生成语法理论中,作为不及物谓词分类的基本依据和不及物句生成所依赖的基本句法配置。非宾格假说认为不及物动词不是整齐划一的一元谓词,而应根据不同的句法及语义属性划分为非宾格动词和非作格动词。非宾格动词只能投射域内论元,该论元在句子生成过程中从深层句法结构中的宾语位置由特别投射规则支配移位到表层主语位置;而非作格动词投射域外论元,其主语无需经过派生移位产生。从语义属性角度来看,非宾格动词投射的域内论元以受事或客体题元角色为原型,而非作格动词的域外论元以施事题元角色为原型。
非宾格假说的理论价值在于维护生成语法学派一贯倡导的句法结构决定语义指派原则:同一题元角色只能对应相同的句法位置,即施事角色从主语位置获得语义解释,而受事或客体角色只能对应深层结构中的宾语位置。非宾格假说虽然创建时间不长,仅仅只有不到三十年的历史,并且其核心框架构建于讲求句法推导的语法学派,但是许多来自跨语言研究的证据显示这种不及物动词的两分法能够用来揭示一些特殊句法结构中因动词属性的不同而造成的表层句法结构的差异,因而也吸引了不同学派的学者参与到对不及物动词分类的讨论之中。这些特殊的句法结构包括荷兰语和德语中的非人称被动式,荷兰语、意大利语以及德语中完成句式中助动词的选择,意大利语中的ne-附着现象。有些学者认为英汉语中动结结构、存现结构、假被动句以及使役交替这四种语法现象中动词的分布规律也反映了非作格与非宾格之间的区别。
但是由于这些特殊句式中不及物动词的分布规律又不尽相同,在很大程度上存在着错配现象,并且不同语言中的非宾格句式或非作格句式差别很大,因而对于非宾格假说在各个语言中的适用性语言学界仍然存在很大的争议。
本文从认知构式角度对英语和汉语里动结结构、存现结构、假被动句以及使役交替这四种语法现象中不及物动词分布的规律进行了探讨,对非宾格假说在英汉两种语言中的适用性进行了质疑和批判,提出这四种语言结构中动词分布规律并不能反映非作格与非宾格之间的差别,而是由这四种语言结构的构式意义所决定的,与构式意义相吻合的动词能够进入该构式。
全文共分五章。第一章回顾了有关非宾格假说的一系列概念,并对本论文的原理、目标、研究方法和论文的结构进行了介绍。第二章是文献回顾,对当前非宾格现象的研究方法和现状进行了总结,指出以往基于词汇语义或深层句法结构角度对非宾格现象的分析都在很大程度上受及物句句法语义特点影响,不能够很好地解释非宾格错配现象出现的原因,因而也就不能全面反映出这些所谓的非宾格假说的诊断句式中动词的分布规律。第三章从构式语法角度分析了英汉语中动结结构、存现结构和假被动句中不及物动词分布的规律。第四章从认知识解角度探讨了一些动词及物和不及物用法交替出现的动因。第五章对本研究做出了结论,指出当前研究的主要发现和理论意义,并对本研究的缺点和今后努力的方向进行了陈述。
与以往基于非宾格假说的分析相比,本研究具有以下特点:
第一,本论文把动词和句式之间的语言界面归结为词汇语义和句法构式意义层面的互动。前人学者的研究多聚焦于深层结构中的句法移位问题,把语言界面定位于词汇语义与深层句法结构之间,忽略了表层句法结构本身所具有的特殊语义和语用功能对动词的压制和选择作用。
第二,本研究能够更准确地描述这些语言结构中的动词分布规律,避免对动词的重复分类。
第三,对非宾格假说的适用性进行了系统性质疑,提出不应该用及物性句法结构的理论模型对不及物句的句法和语义进行描写解释。
Systematic studies on the classification of intransitive predicates based on syntactic and semantic properties began with the 'Unaccusative Hypothesis' (UH in short) proposed by relational grammarians in the late 1970s, which has been later adopted in the transformational generative grammar founded by Chomsky as the bedrock and primitive syntactic configurations for different types of intransitive predicates. According to the UH, intransitive predicates do not constitute a homogeneous class, either syntactically or semantically, and they should be divided into unaccusative and unergative ones. Unaccusative intransitive verbs project only an internal argument, which occupies the D-object position in the initial level of grammatical representation, and emerges as the surface subject due to the interference of independent syntactic principles such as exceptional projection principle (EPP). In contrast, unergative intransitive verbs project only an external argument, which occupies the subject position throughout the grammatical derivational process. In terms of semantic attributes, the internal argument of unaccusative verbs usually carries the thematic role of patient or theme, whereas the external argument of unergative verbs is associated with the agent thematic role.
The UH commands a significant theoretical value as it helps defend the long-cherished principle of generative grammar that advocates the dominance of syntactic structures in assigning semantic values to arguments in the sentences, i.e., the same type of thematic roles should only be assigned by the same syntactic configurations, which means that the agent thematic role can only be found with arguments occupying the D-subject position, and thematic roles such as patient or theme can only be assigned to arguments located at the D-object position. Although with a history of only less than thirty years and a strong theoretical inclination towards the derivational grammatical model, the dichotomous classification formulated in the UH has attracted the interest of scholars from different linguistic schools as cross-linguistic studies show many grammatical structures are seemingly sensitive to the unaccusative-unergative distinction. These grammatical structures, which are named as the 'unaccusative diagnostics' in the literature, include impersonal passives in Dutch and German, perfective auxiliary choices in Dutch, Italian and German, ne-cliticization in Italian, to name just a few. The distributional patterns of verbs in the resultative, existential, pseudo-passive constructions as well as transitivity alternations in English and Chinese are also argued to reflect this unaccusative-unergative distinction.
However, the UH is also regarded as a highly contentious and controversial topic due to the rampant occurrences of unaccusativity mismatches, as this distinction is not only language-specific in the specific formal details of its manifestation but also language-specific in its semantic makeup.
The present dissertation aims to provide a cognitive constructional account of the distributional patterns of verbs entering into the resultative, existential, pseudo-passive constructions and transitivity alternations while questioning the validity of the UH in these four grammatical structures, arguing that analyses based on the unaccusative-unergative distinction render horrendous complexity in predicting the possible types of verbs compatible with the four constructions. The possible verb types that appear with these four constructions are discussed in line with how their lexical semantics align with the constructional meaning of the four sentence-level grammatical constructions, and the unaccusative-unergative restrictions proposed by the approaches following the UH are shown to be inaccurate as they fall short of accounting for the full range of data.
This dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces a number of key concepts with respect to the UH. It also presents the rationale, objective, research methodology and structural organization of the current research. Chapter 2 offers a review of relevant literature by summarizing previous research methodologies and the status quo in the analyses of unaccusative phenomena. It points out that previous studies, be they following the approach of lexical semantics or derivational syntactic frameworks, are all heavily influenced by the transitive-schema-based view of intransitive sentences, which cannot adequately explain unaccusativity mismatches, consequently failing to offer a complete and convincing account of the distributional patterns of verbs in these so-called unaccusative diagnostics. Chapter 3 gives a constructional account of the distributional patterns of verbal predicates in the resultative, existential and pseudo-passive constructions in English and Chinese. Chapter 4 works out a cognitive explanation for transitivity alternations in English and Chinese. Chapter 5 draws a conclusion of the current study and offers the achievements, implications and limitations of the current study.
The current research has the following three features in comparison with previous analyses based on the UH:
First, it zooms in upon the interface between meaningful constructions and lexical semantics. Previous researches are mostly focused on the movement of arguments in grammatical derivations, taking the interface between D-structure syntax and lexicon as the research target while neglecting that overt grammatical constructions have their own independent semantics and discourse functions, which determine the possible types of verbs co-occurring with these constructions.
Secondly, the current research offers a more accurate generalization of the distributional patterns of verbs in the so-called unaccusative diagnostics by avoiding the duplication of lexical entries in the lexicon.
Thirdly, it presents a systematic criticism of the validity of the UH, arguing that it is inappropriate to describe the syntactic and semantic properties of intransitive clauses in line with models based on the transitive grammatical structures.
非宾格假说的理论价值在于维护生成语法学派一贯倡导的句法结构决定语义指派原则:同一题元角色只能对应相同的句法位置,即施事角色从主语位置获得语义解释,而受事或客体角色只能对应深层结构中的宾语位置。非宾格假说虽然创建时间不长,仅仅只有不到三十年的历史,并且其核心框架构建于讲求句法推导的语法学派,但是许多来自跨语言研究的证据显示这种不及物动词的两分法能够用来揭示一些特殊句法结构中因动词属性的不同而造成的表层句法结构的差异,因而也吸引了不同学派的学者参与到对不及物动词分类的讨论之中。这些特殊的句法结构包括荷兰语和德语中的非人称被动式,荷兰语、意大利语以及德语中完成句式中助动词的选择,意大利语中的ne-附着现象。有些学者认为英汉语中动结结构、存现结构、假被动句以及使役交替这四种语法现象中动词的分布规律也反映了非作格与非宾格之间的区别。
但是由于这些特殊句式中不及物动词的分布规律又不尽相同,在很大程度上存在着错配现象,并且不同语言中的非宾格句式或非作格句式差别很大,因而对于非宾格假说在各个语言中的适用性语言学界仍然存在很大的争议。
本文从认知构式角度对英语和汉语里动结结构、存现结构、假被动句以及使役交替这四种语法现象中不及物动词分布的规律进行了探讨,对非宾格假说在英汉两种语言中的适用性进行了质疑和批判,提出这四种语言结构中动词分布规律并不能反映非作格与非宾格之间的差别,而是由这四种语言结构的构式意义所决定的,与构式意义相吻合的动词能够进入该构式。
全文共分五章。第一章回顾了有关非宾格假说的一系列概念,并对本论文的原理、目标、研究方法和论文的结构进行了介绍。第二章是文献回顾,对当前非宾格现象的研究方法和现状进行了总结,指出以往基于词汇语义或深层句法结构角度对非宾格现象的分析都在很大程度上受及物句句法语义特点影响,不能够很好地解释非宾格错配现象出现的原因,因而也就不能全面反映出这些所谓的非宾格假说的诊断句式中动词的分布规律。第三章从构式语法角度分析了英汉语中动结结构、存现结构和假被动句中不及物动词分布的规律。第四章从认知识解角度探讨了一些动词及物和不及物用法交替出现的动因。第五章对本研究做出了结论,指出当前研究的主要发现和理论意义,并对本研究的缺点和今后努力的方向进行了陈述。
与以往基于非宾格假说的分析相比,本研究具有以下特点:
第一,本论文把动词和句式之间的语言界面归结为词汇语义和句法构式意义层面的互动。前人学者的研究多聚焦于深层结构中的句法移位问题,把语言界面定位于词汇语义与深层句法结构之间,忽略了表层句法结构本身所具有的特殊语义和语用功能对动词的压制和选择作用。
第二,本研究能够更准确地描述这些语言结构中的动词分布规律,避免对动词的重复分类。
第三,对非宾格假说的适用性进行了系统性质疑,提出不应该用及物性句法结构的理论模型对不及物句的句法和语义进行描写解释。
Systematic studies on the classification of intransitive predicates based on syntactic and semantic properties began with the 'Unaccusative Hypothesis' (UH in short) proposed by relational grammarians in the late 1970s, which has been later adopted in the transformational generative grammar founded by Chomsky as the bedrock and primitive syntactic configurations for different types of intransitive predicates. According to the UH, intransitive predicates do not constitute a homogeneous class, either syntactically or semantically, and they should be divided into unaccusative and unergative ones. Unaccusative intransitive verbs project only an internal argument, which occupies the D-object position in the initial level of grammatical representation, and emerges as the surface subject due to the interference of independent syntactic principles such as exceptional projection principle (EPP). In contrast, unergative intransitive verbs project only an external argument, which occupies the subject position throughout the grammatical derivational process. In terms of semantic attributes, the internal argument of unaccusative verbs usually carries the thematic role of patient or theme, whereas the external argument of unergative verbs is associated with the agent thematic role.
The UH commands a significant theoretical value as it helps defend the long-cherished principle of generative grammar that advocates the dominance of syntactic structures in assigning semantic values to arguments in the sentences, i.e., the same type of thematic roles should only be assigned by the same syntactic configurations, which means that the agent thematic role can only be found with arguments occupying the D-subject position, and thematic roles such as patient or theme can only be assigned to arguments located at the D-object position. Although with a history of only less than thirty years and a strong theoretical inclination towards the derivational grammatical model, the dichotomous classification formulated in the UH has attracted the interest of scholars from different linguistic schools as cross-linguistic studies show many grammatical structures are seemingly sensitive to the unaccusative-unergative distinction. These grammatical structures, which are named as the 'unaccusative diagnostics' in the literature, include impersonal passives in Dutch and German, perfective auxiliary choices in Dutch, Italian and German, ne-cliticization in Italian, to name just a few. The distributional patterns of verbs in the resultative, existential, pseudo-passive constructions as well as transitivity alternations in English and Chinese are also argued to reflect this unaccusative-unergative distinction.
However, the UH is also regarded as a highly contentious and controversial topic due to the rampant occurrences of unaccusativity mismatches, as this distinction is not only language-specific in the specific formal details of its manifestation but also language-specific in its semantic makeup.
The present dissertation aims to provide a cognitive constructional account of the distributional patterns of verbs entering into the resultative, existential, pseudo-passive constructions and transitivity alternations while questioning the validity of the UH in these four grammatical structures, arguing that analyses based on the unaccusative-unergative distinction render horrendous complexity in predicting the possible types of verbs compatible with the four constructions. The possible verb types that appear with these four constructions are discussed in line with how their lexical semantics align with the constructional meaning of the four sentence-level grammatical constructions, and the unaccusative-unergative restrictions proposed by the approaches following the UH are shown to be inaccurate as they fall short of accounting for the full range of data.
This dissertation consists of five chapters. Chapter 1 introduces a number of key concepts with respect to the UH. It also presents the rationale, objective, research methodology and structural organization of the current research. Chapter 2 offers a review of relevant literature by summarizing previous research methodologies and the status quo in the analyses of unaccusative phenomena. It points out that previous studies, be they following the approach of lexical semantics or derivational syntactic frameworks, are all heavily influenced by the transitive-schema-based view of intransitive sentences, which cannot adequately explain unaccusativity mismatches, consequently failing to offer a complete and convincing account of the distributional patterns of verbs in these so-called unaccusative diagnostics. Chapter 3 gives a constructional account of the distributional patterns of verbal predicates in the resultative, existential and pseudo-passive constructions in English and Chinese. Chapter 4 works out a cognitive explanation for transitivity alternations in English and Chinese. Chapter 5 draws a conclusion of the current study and offers the achievements, implications and limitations of the current study.
The current research has the following three features in comparison with previous analyses based on the UH:
First, it zooms in upon the interface between meaningful constructions and lexical semantics. Previous researches are mostly focused on the movement of arguments in grammatical derivations, taking the interface between D-structure syntax and lexicon as the research target while neglecting that overt grammatical constructions have their own independent semantics and discourse functions, which determine the possible types of verbs co-occurring with these constructions.
Secondly, the current research offers a more accurate generalization of the distributional patterns of verbs in the so-called unaccusative diagnostics by avoiding the duplication of lexical entries in the lexicon.
Thirdly, it presents a systematic criticism of the validity of the UH, arguing that it is inappropriate to describe the syntactic and semantic properties of intransitive clauses in line with models based on the transitive grammatical structures.
引文
Abraham,W.,& Leiss,E.(2006).Personal and impersonal passives:Definite vs.indefinite diatheses.Transactions of the Philological Society 104(2),259-296.
Aissen,J.(1975).Presentational-there insertion:A cyclic root transformation.Proceedings of CLS 11(1),1-14.
Alexiadou A.,E.Anagnostopoulou,& F.Schafer.(2006).Phases of interpretation.In M.Frascarelli(Ed.),The properties of anticausatives cross-linguistically(pp.187-211).Berlin:Mouton.
An,F.C.[安丰存].(2007).题元角色林论与领有名词提升移位。解放军外国语学院院报3,11-17.
Arad,M.(1998).Are unaccusatives aspectually characterized?(And other related questions).The MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32,1-20.
Aristotle.(1984).Metaphysics.In J.Barnes(Ed.),The complete works of Aristolle:The revised Oxford translation,Volume 2.Princeton,New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
Bach,E.(1981).The algebra of events.Linguistics and Philosophy 9,5-16.
Basilico,D.(1997).The topic is 'there'.Studia Linguistica 51(3),278-316
Baker,M.(1988).Incorporation:a theory of grammatical function change.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1997).Thematic roles and syntactic structure.In L.Haegeman(Ed.),Elements of grammar(pp.73-137),Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Belletti,A.,& L.Rizzi.(198 I).The syntax of he:some theoretical implications.The Linguistic Review 1,117-154.
Belletti,A.(1988).The case of unaccusatives.Linguistic Inquiry 19,1-34.
Bennis,H.J.(2004).Unergative adjectives and psych verbs.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle." explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.84-113).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Birner,B.J.(1994).Information structure and word order:An analysis of English inversion.Language 70,233-259.
-.(1995).Pragmatic constraints on the verb in English inversion.Lingua 97.233-256.
Boas,C.H.(2003).A constructional approach to resultatives.Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Bolinger,D.(1977).Meaning and form.London and New York:Longmans.
Borer,H.(1994).The Projection of arguments.In E.Benedicto,& J.Runner(Eds.),Functional projections.University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 17,19-47.Umass,Amherst.
-.(2004).The Grammar Machine.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.288-331).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
-.(2005).Structuring Sense,Vol.I & 11.Oxford:Oxford University Press
Bowers,J.(1997).A binary analysis of resultatives,Texas Linguistic Forum 38,43-58.
Bordelois,I.(1988).Causatives:from lexicon to syntax.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6:57-93.
Bresnan,J.(1994).Locative inversion and the architecture of UG.Language 70,72-131.
- & J.M.Kanerva.(1989).Locative inversion in Chichewa:A case study of factorization in grammar.Linguistic lnquiry 20,1-50.
- & A.Zaenen.(1990).Deep unaccusativity in LFG.In Dziwirek,K.,P.Farrel,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.),Grammatical relations:A cross-theoretical perspective(pp.45-57).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Bruthiaux,P.(2001).Missing in action:verbal metaphor for information technology.English Study 3,24-30.
Burzio,L.(1986).Italian syntax:A government-binding approach.Dordrecht:Reidel.
Cai,J.T.[蔡金亭].(2000).中国学生英语过渡与中的作格动词。外语教学与研究4,283-289.
Carrier,J.,& J.Randall.(1992).The argument structure and syntactic structure of resultatives.Linguistic Inquiry 23,173-234.
Chafe,W.(1976).Givenness,constrastiveness,definiteness,subjects,topics and point of view.In Charles N.Li(Ed.),Subject and topic(pp.25-55).New York:Academic Press.
-.(1994).Discourse,consciousness and time.Chicago and London:The University of Chicago Press.
Chao,Y.R.(1968).A grammar of spoken Chinese.Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press.
Chen.T.Z.[陈庭珍].(1957),.汉语中处所词做主语的存在句.中国语文8,15-19.
Chierchia,G..,& S.McConnell-Ginet.(1990).Meaning and grammar." an introduction to semantics.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
Chierchia,G.(2004).A semantics of unaccusativity.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity Puzzle:Explorations of the Syntax-Lexicon Interface(pp.22-59).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Chomsky,N.(1957).Syntactic structures.The Hague:Mouton.
-.(1965).Aspects of the theory of syntax.Cambridge:The MIT Press
-.(1981).Lectures on government and binding.Foris:Dordrecht.
-.(1986).Knowledge of language:its nature,origin,and use,New York:Praeger.
-.(1991).Some notes on economy of derivation and representation.In R.Freidin(Ed.),Principles and Parameters in Comparative Syntax(pp.417-454).Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1992).A minimalist program for linguistic theory,Occasional Papers in Linguistics,MIT.
-.(1995).The Minimalist Program.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
Chu,X.Q.[褚孝泉].(2006).论语言学的方法论基础。复旦学报4,127-133.
Comrie,B.(1978).Ergativity.In W.P.Lehmann(Ed.)Syntactic typology:Studies in the phenomenology of language(pp.329-94)Austin:University of Texas Press.
-.(1989).Language universals and linguistic typology:Syntax and morphology,2nd ed.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Coopmans,E(1989).Where stylistic and syntactic processes meet:Locative inversion in English.Language 65(4),728-751.
Croft,W.(1991).Syntactic categories and grammatical relations:The cognitive organization of information.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1994).Voice:beyond control and affectedness.In Barbara Fox and Paul J.Hopper(Eds.)Voice:Form and function(pp.89-117).Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
-.(1998).Event structure in argument linking.In M.Butt and W.Geuder(Eds.),The Projection of arguments(pp.21-64).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
-.(2001).Radical construction grammar.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Croft,W.& E.J.Wood.(2000).Construal operations in linguistics and artificial intelligence.In L.Albertazi(Ed.),Meaning and Cognition:A multidisciplinary approach(pp.51-78).Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Davidse,K.(1992).Yransitivity/ergativity:the Janus-headed grammar of actions and events.In M.,Davies,& L.Ravelli.(Eds.),Advances in Systemic Linguistics:Recent theory and practice(pp.105-135).London:Pinter.
Denison,D.(1985).Why old English had no prepositional passive.English Studies 66,189-204.
Ding.S.S.[丁声树].(1961).现代汉语语法讲话.北京:商务印书馆。
Dixon.R.M.W.,(1979).Ergativity.Language 55,59-138.
-.(1987).Studies in ergativity:introduction.Lingua 71,1-16.
-.(1994).Ergativity.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Dowty,D.(1979).Word meaning and Montague grammar.Dordrecht:Reidel.
-.(1991).Thematic Proto-roles and argument selection.Language 67,547-619.
Dziwirek,K.,P.Farrel,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.).(1990)Grammatical relations:A cross-theoreticalperspective.Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Emonds,Joseph.(1976).A transformational approach to English Syntax.New York:Academic Press.
Eguzkitza,A.,& Kaiser,A.G.(1999).Postverbal subjects in Romance and German:Some notes on the Unaccusative Hypothesis.Lingua 109,195-219.
Fan,F.L.[范方莲].(1957).存在句。中国语文5,386-395
Fiengo,Robert W.(1980).Semantic conditions on surface structure.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,MIT,Cambridge,Mass.
Fillmore,Charles J.(1968).The Case for Case.In E.,Bach & R.T.Harms(Eds.),Universals in Linguistic Theory(pp.1-88).New York:Holt.
-.(1970).The grammar of 'hitting' and 'breaking'.In R.A.,Jacobs & P.S.Rosenbaum(Eds.),Readings in English transformational grammar(pp.120-133).New York:John Wiley.
-.(1977).Scenes and frames semantics.In A.Zampolli,(Ed.),Linguistic structures processing(pp.55-81).Amsterdam:Benjamins.
-.(1985).Syntactic intrusions and the notion of grammatical construction.BLS 11,73-86.
-.(1988).The mechanisms of 'construction grammar'.BLS 14,35-55.
Fillmore,C.J.,P.Kay,& M.C.O'Connor.(1988).Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions:The case of let alone.Language 64,501-38.
Foley,W.A.& R.D.Van Valin,Jr.(1984).Functional syntax and Universal Grammar.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Freeze,Ray.(1992).Existentials and other locatives.Language 68(3),553-595.
Gamon,C.D.(1997).The grammaticalizations of grammatical relations:A typological and historical study involving Kashaya Pomo,Old English and Modern English.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of California,Berkeley.
Gao,M.L.[高明乐].(2004).题元角色的句法实现。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
Gao,Qian.(1996).Resultative verb compounds and Ba-construction in Chinese.Journal of Chinese Linguistics 25,84-130.
Gerdts,D.(1991).Unaccusative mismatches in Halkomelem Salish.International Journal of American Linguistics 57(2),230-250.
Givon,Talmy.(1979).On understanding grammar.New York:Academic Press.
-.(1984).Syntax:A functional-typological introduction,Vol.1.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Goh,G.Y.(2001).The advent of the prepositional passive:An innovation of Middle English? English Studies 3,203-217.
Goldberg,A.E.(1995).Constructions-A constructional grammar approach to argument structure.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
-.(2002).Construction Grammar.In R.A.Wilson & F.C.Keil(Eds.),Encyclopedia of cognitive science.Macmillan Reference Limited Nature Publishing Group.
-.(2003).Construction:A new theoretical approach to language.Journal of Foreign Languages 3,1-11
-.& R.Jackendoff.(2004).The English resultative as a family of constructions.Language,80(3),532-568.
-,D.Casenhiser,& N.Sethuraman.(2005).A lexically based proposal of argument structure meaning.Journal of Foreign Languages 1,3-13
-.(2006).Constructions at work:the nature of generalization in language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Gong,Q.Y[龚千炎].(1980),.现代汉语罩的受事主语句。中国语文5,34-39
Grimshaw,J.(1987).Unaccusative-an overview.Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 17,244-59.
-.(1990).Argument structure.Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press.
Grewendorf,G.(1989).Ergativity in German.Dordrecht:Foris.
Grice,P.(1975).Logic and conversation.In P.Cole & J.Morgan(Eds.),Syntax and semantics 3:Speech acts(pp.41-58).New York:Academic Press.
Gruber,J.S.(1976).Lexical structures in syntax and semantics.Amsterdam:Northe-Holland.
Gu,Y.(1992a).On the locative existential construction in Chinese.In D.Bates(Ed.),10th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics(183-195).Stanford:The Stanford Linguistic Association.
-.(1992b).The syntax of resultative and causative compounds in Chinese.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Comell University.
-.(1997).关于存现结构的理论探讨。现代汉语3,14-25.
Guerssel,M.et al.(1985).A cross-linguistic study of transitivity alternations.Papers from the 21st Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society:Parasession on causatives and agentivity 21(2),48-63
Haegeman,L.(1994).Introduction to Government and Binding Theory.2nd edition.Oxford:Blackwell.
Hale,K.and S.J.Keyser.(1986).Some transitivity alternations in English.Lexicon Project Working Papers 7.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1993).On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.In K.Hale and S.J.Keyser(Eds.),The view from Building 20(pp.53-109).Cambridge:The MIT Press.
-.(1997).The basic elements of argument structure.Ms.MIT.
-.(2002).Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
Hall,B.(1965).Subject and object in modern English,MIT dissertation.Published by Garland Publishing,New York,1979,as by Barbara Hall Partee.
Halliday,M.A.K.(1985).An Introduction to functional grammar.1st edition.London:Edward Arnold.
Han,J.Q.[韩景泉].(2000).领有名词提升移位与格理论。现代外语3,261-272.
-.(2001).英汉语存现句的生成句法研究。现代汉语2,143-158。
Haspelmath,M.(1993).More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations.In B.Comrie & M.Polinsky(Eds.).Causatives and transitivity.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Hartl,H.(2003).Conceptual and grammatical characteristics of argument alternations.Linguistics 41(5),883-916.
Harris,A.1982.Georgian and the unaccusative hypothesis.Language 58,290-306
Hoeskstra,T.(1984).Transitivity:grammatical relations in Government-binding Theory.Dordrecht:Foris.
-.(1988).Small clause results.Lingua 74,101-39.
Hoeskstra,T.,& R.Mulder.(1990).Unergatives as copular verbs:locational and existential predication.The Linguistic Review 7,1-79.
Hopper,P.J.& S.A.Thompson.(1980).Transitivity in grammar and discourse.Language 56,251-99.
Horrocks,G.& M.Stavrou.(2007).Grammaticalized aspect and spatio-temporal culmination.Lingua 117(4),605-644.
Hu,W.Z.[胡文泽].(1995).存现句的时段语义.语言研究2,100-112.
Huang.C.T.[黄正德](1987).Existential Sentence in Chinese and(in)definiteness.In E.Reuland & ter Meulen,A.(Eds.),The representation of(in)definiteness(pp.226-253).Cambridge:MIT Press.
-.(2007)现代汉语的题元结构与句法表现.语言科学4,3-21.
Huang,N.S.[黄南松].(1996).论存在句.汉语学习4,28-32页.
Isaak,A.(2000).Split case marking and prominence relations.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Jackendoff,R.(1972).Semantic interpretation in generative grammar.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1976).Toward an explanatory semantic representation.Linguistic Inquiry 7,89-150.
-.(1983).Semantics and cognition.Cambridge,Massachusetts:MIT Press.
-.(1990).Semantic structures.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1997a).Twistin' the night away.Language 73,534-59.
-.(1997b).The architecture of the language faculty.Cambridge:MIT Press.
Jenkins,L.(1975).The English existential.Niemeyer:Tubingen.
Jesperson,O.(1924).The philosophy of grammar.London:George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
-.(1927).A modern English grammar on historical principles Part Ⅲ:Syntax.Vol.2.Heidelberg:Carl Winters.
-.(1965).A modern English grammar on historical principles,Part Ⅵ,Morphology.London:George Allen and Unwin Ltd.(First published in 1927 by Carl Winter).
Johnson,C.(2000).Constructional grounding:On the relation between deictic and existential there-constructions in acquisition.In A.Cienki,J.Barbara & M.B.Smith(Eds.),Conceptual and discourse factors in linguistic structure(pp.123-136).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Kay,P.,& C.J.,Fillmore.(1999).Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations:The What's X doing Y construction.Language 75,1-34.
Keller,E.& A.Sorace,2003.Gradient auxiliary selection in German:an experimental investigation.Journal of Linguistics 39(1),57-108.
Keyser,S.J.,& Roeper,T.(1984).On the middle and ergative construction in English,Linguistic Inquiry 15,381-416
Kim,Y.(1997).A situation semantic account of existential sentences.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Stanford University.
Klimov,G.A.(1974).On the character of languages of active typology.Linguistics 131,11-25.
Kuno,S.(1971).The position of locatives in existential sentences.Linguistic Inquiry 2,333-378.
Kuno,S.,& Takami,K.(2004).Functional Constraints in Grammar:On the unergative-unaccusative distinction.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Labelle,M.(1992).Change of state and valency.Journal of Linguistics 28,375-414.
Lakoff,(1(1987).Women,fire and dangerous things.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1996).Sorry,I'm not myself today:The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self.In.(1 Fauehonnier & E.Sweester(Eds.),Spaces,worm and grammar(pp.91-123).Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff,G.& Johnson,Mark.(1999).Philosophy in the flesh.New York:Basic Books.
Lambrecht,K.(1994).Information structure and sentence form:Topic,focus,and the mental representations of discourse referents.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Langaeker.R.W.(1982).Space grammar,analyzability,and the English passive.Language 58,22-80.
-.(1987).Foundations of cognitive grammar.Vol.Ⅰ:Theoretical prerequisite.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
-.(1991).Foundations of cognitive grammar,Vol.Ⅱ:Descriptive application.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
-.(1999).Grammar and conceptualization.Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
-.(2000).Why a mind is necessary:Conceptualization,grammar and linguistic semantics.In L.Albertazi(Ed.),Meaning and cognition:,4 multidisciplinary approach(pp.25-38).Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Larson,R.(1988).On the double object construction.Linguistic Inquiry 19,335-391.
Legendre,G.(1989).Unaccusativity in French.Lingua 79,95-164
-.(2007).On the Typology of auxiliary selection.Lingual 17(9),1522-1540.
Lemmens,M.(1998).Lexical perspectives on transitivity and ergativity.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Levin,B.(1993).English verb classes and alternation:A preliminary investigation.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Levin,B.,& M.Rappaport.(1989).An approach to unaccusative mismatches.Proceedings of NELS 19,314-328.University of Massachusetts,Amherst.
-.(1994).A preliminary analysis of causative verbs in English.In L.Gleitman & and B.Landau(Eds.)The acquisition of the lexicon(pp,35-77).Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1995).Unaccusativity:At the syntax-lexical semantics interface.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
-.(2005).Argument realization.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Li.J.L and L.F.Wang.[李京廉,王立非].(2005).英汉存现句的句法研究。现代 汉语4,350-359。
Li,Y.F.(1990).On V-V compounds in Chinese.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8,177-207.
-.(1993).Structural head and aspectuality.Language 69,480-504.
-.(1995).The thematic hierarchy and causativity.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13,255-282.
-.(1999).Cross-componential causativity.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17,445-497.
Li,Y.H.(1990).Order and constituency in Mandarin Chinese.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
Lightfoot.D.(1979).Principles ofdiachronic syntax.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Liu,F.H.[刘凤樨].(2007).Auxiliary selection in Chinese.In R.Aranovich(Ed.),Split auxiliary systems:A cross-linguistic perspective(pp,181-205).Amsterdam:John Beniamins Publishing Co.
Liu,X.L.[刘晓林].(2007).也谈“王冕死了父亲”的生成方式。中国语文5,440-443.
Lumsden,M.(1988).Existential sentences:Their structure and meaning.London:Croom Helm.
Lv,Y.S.[吕云生].(2005,).有关“施事后置”及“非宾格假说”的几个问题.语言科学4,50-70.
Lyons,C.(1999).Definiteness.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Lyons,J.(1968).Introduction to theoretical linguistics.London:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1977).Semantics Vol.2.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Manning,H.P.(1995).Fluid intransitivity in Middle Welsh:Gradience,typology and 'unaccusativity'.Lingua 97,171-194.
McClure,W.(1990).A lexical semantic explanation for unaccusative mismatches.In K.Dziwirek,P.Farrell,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.),Grammatical relations:A cross-theoretical perspective(pp.305-318).Stanford,CA:CSLI.
Milsark,G.(1979).Existential sentences in English.New York:Garland.
Miyagawa,S.(1989).Light verbs and the ergative hypothesis.Linguistic Inquiry 20,659-668.
Pan.H.H.[潘海华](1996).Imperfective aspect zhe,agent deletion and locative inversion.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14,409-432.
Pan,H.H.and J.Q.,Han.[潘海华,韩景泉].(2005).显性非宾格动词结构的句法研究。语言研究3,1-13.
Peeters,B.(1998).Review of B.Levin & M.Rappaport Hovav "Unaccusativity:At the syntax-lexical semantics interface".Word 49(2),300-303.
Perlmutter,D.(1978).Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypotheses.BLS 4,157-89.
-.(1980).Relational grammar.In E.Moravcsik & J.R.Wirth(Eds.),Syntax and semantics 13(pp.195-227).New York:Academic Press.
- & Postal.(Eds.).(1983).Studies in Relational Grammar 1.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-& Postal,P.(1983).'Some proposed laws of basic clause structure'.In Perlmutter and Postal(Eds.),(pp,81-128).
- &Postal,P.(1984).The 1-advancement exclusiveness law.In Perlmutter and Rosen(1984:38-77).
- & Rosen,C.(eds.).(1984).Studies in relational grammar 2.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1989).Multiattaehment and the unaccusative hypothesis:the perfect auxiliary in Italian.Probus 1,63-119.
Pustejovsky,J.(1995).The generative lexicon.MIT Press:Cambridge,MA.
Pinker,S.(1989).Learnability and cognition:The acquisition of argument structure.MIT Press:Cambridge,MA.
Pollard,C.& I.A.Sag.(1994).Head-driven phrase structure Grammar.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Postal,M.P.(1977).About a nonargument for raising.Linguistic Inquiry 8,141-154.
-.(2004).Skeptical linguistic essays.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Pullum,t2 K.(1988).Citation etiquette beyond thunderdome.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6,579-588.
Rando,E.& D.J.Napoli.(1978).Definites in THERE-sentences.Language 54,300-313.
Rappaport,T.R.(1999).Structure,aspect and predicate.Language 75,653-677.
Rappaport,M.& B.Levin.(1988).What to do with Yheta Roles.In W.Wilkins(Ed.),Syntax and semantics 21:Thematic relations(pp.7-36).San Diego,CA.:Academic Press
-.(2001).An event structure account of English resultatives.Language 77,766-797.
-.(2005).Review ofA.Alexiadou,E Anagnostopoulou & M.Everaert(Eds.),"The Unaccusativity puzzle:explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface".Journal of Linguistics 41,623-629.
Robins,R.H.(1989).General linguistics,4th Edition.London:Longman Group UK Ltd.
Rosen,C.(1984).The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical relations.In Perlmutter and Rosen(pp,38-77).
Safir,K.(1982).Syntactic chains and the definiteness effect.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,MIT:Cambridge,MA.
Sapir,E.(1917).Review of C.C.Uhlenbeck:Het passieve karakter van her verbum transitivum of van het verbum actionis in Talen van Noord-Amerika.International Journal of American Linguistics 1,82-86.
Schoorlemmer,M.(2004).Syntactic unaccusativity in Russian.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.207-242).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Shaumyan,S.(1987).A Semiotic theory of language.Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
Shi,Y.Z.[石毓智].(2007).语言学假设中的证据问题。语言科学4,39-51.
Shibatani,M.(1976).The grammar of causative constructions:A conspectus.In M.Shitatani(ed.),Syntax and semantics,Vol.6:The grammar of causative constructions(pp.1-40).New York:Academic Press.
-.(1985).Passives and related constructions:A prototype analysis.Language 61,821-848.
Shen,Y,Y.J.He and Y Gu.[沈阳,何元建,顾阳].(2001).生成语法理论与汉语语法研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社。
Simpson,J.(1983).Resultatives.In L.Levin,M.Rappaport & Zaenen(Eds.),Papers in lexical-functional grammar(pp.143-157).Indiana University Linguistics Club:Bloomington,
Smith,C.S.1970.Jespersen's 'Move and Change' class and causative verbs in English.In A.J.Mohammad,E.C.Polome & W.Winter(Eds.),Linguistic and literary studies in honor of Archibald A.Hill 2:descriptive linguistics(pp.101-9).Mouton:The Hague.
Sode,R.(1995).Intentionality and VN-suru constructions in Japanese.The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 29(2),22-54.
Song,W.H.[宋文辉].(2006,).自动动结式的使动化。语文研究与探索(十三)pp.113-127.
Sorace,A.(1995).Acquiring linking rules and argument structures in a second language:the unaccusative/unergative distinction.In:L.Eubank,L.Selinker & M.Sharwood-Smith(Eds.),The current state of interlanguage(pp.153-175).Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
-.(2000).Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs.Language 76(4),859-890
-.(2004).Gradience at the lexicon-syntax interface:Evidence from auxiliary selection and implications for unaccusativity.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle." Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.243-268).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Sybesma,Rint.1999.The Mandarin VP.Dordrecht,The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tai,J.(1984).Verbs and times in Chinese:Vendler's four categories.Parasession on lexical semantics 20,289-296.Chicago:Chicago Linguistic Society.
Talmy,L.(1985a).Lexicalization patterns:Semantic structure in lexical forms.In T.Shopen(Ed.),Language typology and syntactic description,Vol.3:Grammatical categories and the lexicon(pp.57-149).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1985b).Force dynamics in language and thought.Parasession on causatives and agentivity 21(1),293-337.Chicago:Chicago Linguistic Society.
-.(2000a).Cognitive semantics,Vol.1.Cambridge:MIT Press.
-.(2000b).Cognitive semantics,Vol.2.Cambridge:MIT Press.
Tang,T.Ch.[汤廷池].(2002),汉语复合动词的“使动”与“起动”交替”.语言暨语言学3,615-644.
Tang Y.-Z.[唐玉柱].(2001).存在句中的there.《现代汉语》1,23-33.
-.(2005).存现动词的非宾格性假设。重庆大学学报(社科版)4,84-87
Tenny,C.(1994).Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface.Kluwer:Dordrecht.
Thompson,G.(1996).Introducing functional grammar.London:Arnold.
Thompson,S.(1973).Resultative verb compounds in Mandarin Chinese:A case for lexical rules.Language 49,361-379.
Tsunoda,T.(1994).Transitivity.In R.E.Asher et al.(Eds.)The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics 9,4670-77.Oxford:Pergaman press.
-.(1999).Transitivity and intransitivity.Journal of Asian and African Studies 57,1-9.
Van Hout,A.(2004).Unaccusativity as Telicity Checking.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.22-59).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Van Voorst,J.(1995).The semantic structure of causative constructions.Studies in Language 19,489-523
van Valin,R.D.(1990).Semantic parameters of split intransitivity.Language 66(2),221-260.
- & Lapolla,R.(1997).Syntax:structure,meaning and function.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1999).Generalized semantic roles and the syntax-semantics interface,In F.Corblin,C.Dobrovie-Sorin & J.M.Marandin,(Eds.),Empirical issues informal syntax and semantics 2(pp.373-389).The Hague:Thesus.
Vendler,Z.(1967).Linguistics in philosophy.Ithaca,NY:Comell University Press.
Wang,J.W.[王建伟](2007a).计算机带来的新兴非宾格现象。外语与翻译2,1-6.
-.(2007b),.从“非完成态悖论”的解决方案看汉语中的”完成态悖论”.现代外语1.51-56.
Wang,L.D.[王立弟].(2003).论元结构新论。北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
Wang,Z.J.[王志军].(2004).英汉被动句认知对比研究。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
Wen,B.L.[温宾利].(2002).当代句法学导论。北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
Wen,B.L.&Chen,Z.L.[温宾利、陈宗利].(2001).领有名词移位:基于MP的分析。现代外语4,412-416.
Whaley,L.(1997).An introduction to typology." The unity and diversity of language.Thousand Oaks:Sage.
White,L.(2003).Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Williams,E.(1980).Predication.Linguistic Inquiry 11,203-238.
-.(1984).There-insertion.Linguistic lnquiry 15,131-153.
-.(1997).Review of Beth Levin & Malka Rappaport Hovav:Unaccusativity:at the syntax-lexical interface.Journal of Linguistics 33,595-600.
Woolford,E.(1997).Four-way case systems:Ergative,nominative,objective,and accusative.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15,181-227.
Wright,S.(2001).Internally and externally caused change of state verbs.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Northwestern University.Evanston.
Xia,X.R.[夏晓蓉].(2001).英汉V+R结构与非宾格现象。外语教学与研究 3,172-177.
Xiong,X.L.,&X.B.,Liang,[熊学亮,梁晓波].(2004).致使结构英汉表达异同。外语教学与研究3,90-96
Xu,J.[徐杰].(1999).两种保留宾语句式及相关句法理论问题。当代语言学1,16-29.
-.(2001).“及物性”特征及相关的四类动词。语言研究3,1-10.
Yan,C.S.[严辰松].(2006).构式语法论要。解放军外国语学院学报4,6-11
Yang,S.-Y.[杨素英].(1999).从非宾格现象看语义与句法结构之间的关系。当代语言学1,30-43
Yang,S.Y&H.H.Pan[杨素英,潘海华].(2001).A constructional analysis of the existential structure.In Pan,H.H.(Ed.),Studies in Chinese linguistics Ⅱ(pp.189-208).Hong Kong:Linguistic Society of Hong Kong.
Yang,S.-Y.,et al.[杨素英等].(2007).汉语作为第二语言存现句习得研究。汉语学习1,59-70.
Yip,M.,J.Maling,& R.Jackendoff.(1987).Case in tiers.Language 63,217-250.
Yip,V.(1995).Interlanguage and learnability:From Chinese to English.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Yuan,B.-P.[袁博平].(2002).汉语中的两种不及物动词与汉语第二语言习得。世界汉语教学3,91-101.
Yu,J.Y[俞建耀].(2006).英语非宾格动词在外语习得过程中的被动泛化综合解释。西安外国语学院学报3,40-43.
Zaenen,A.(1988).Unaccusative verbs in Dutch and the syntax-semantics interface.CSLI Report No.CSLI-88-123.Stanford:CSLI.
-.(1993).Unaccusativity in Dutch:Integrating syntax and lexical semantics.In J.Pustejovsky(Ed.),Semantics and lexicon(pp.129-161).Dordrecht:Kluwer.
Zhan,R.F.[詹人凤].(1989).动结式短语的表述问题.中国语文2,105-111
Zhao,Y.C.[赵彦春].(2001).Burzio内论元说证伪。现代汉语2,133-142
-.(2002).作格动词与存现结构症结。外语学刊2,63-67
Zhou,X.P.(1990).Aspects of Chinese syntax:Ergativity and phrase Structure.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Zobl,H.(1989).Canonical typological structures and ergativity in English L2 acquisition.In S.Gass & J.Sehachter.(Eds.),Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition(pp.203-221).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Aissen,J.(1975).Presentational-there insertion:A cyclic root transformation.Proceedings of CLS 11(1),1-14.
Alexiadou A.,E.Anagnostopoulou,& F.Schafer.(2006).Phases of interpretation.In M.Frascarelli(Ed.),The properties of anticausatives cross-linguistically(pp.187-211).Berlin:Mouton.
An,F.C.[安丰存].(2007).题元角色林论与领有名词提升移位。解放军外国语学院院报3,11-17.
Arad,M.(1998).Are unaccusatives aspectually characterized?(And other related questions).The MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 32,1-20.
Aristotle.(1984).Metaphysics.In J.Barnes(Ed.),The complete works of Aristolle:The revised Oxford translation,Volume 2.Princeton,New Jersey:Princeton University Press.
Bach,E.(1981).The algebra of events.Linguistics and Philosophy 9,5-16.
Basilico,D.(1997).The topic is 'there'.Studia Linguistica 51(3),278-316
Baker,M.(1988).Incorporation:a theory of grammatical function change.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1997).Thematic roles and syntactic structure.In L.Haegeman(Ed.),Elements of grammar(pp.73-137),Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Belletti,A.,& L.Rizzi.(198 I).The syntax of he:some theoretical implications.The Linguistic Review 1,117-154.
Belletti,A.(1988).The case of unaccusatives.Linguistic Inquiry 19,1-34.
Bennis,H.J.(2004).Unergative adjectives and psych verbs.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle." explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.84-113).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Birner,B.J.(1994).Information structure and word order:An analysis of English inversion.Language 70,233-259.
-.(1995).Pragmatic constraints on the verb in English inversion.Lingua 97.233-256.
Boas,C.H.(2003).A constructional approach to resultatives.Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Bolinger,D.(1977).Meaning and form.London and New York:Longmans.
Borer,H.(1994).The Projection of arguments.In E.Benedicto,& J.Runner(Eds.),Functional projections.University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers 17,19-47.Umass,Amherst.
-.(2004).The Grammar Machine.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.288-331).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
-.(2005).Structuring Sense,Vol.I & 11.Oxford:Oxford University Press
Bowers,J.(1997).A binary analysis of resultatives,Texas Linguistic Forum 38,43-58.
Bordelois,I.(1988).Causatives:from lexicon to syntax.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6:57-93.
Bresnan,J.(1994).Locative inversion and the architecture of UG.Language 70,72-131.
- & J.M.Kanerva.(1989).Locative inversion in Chichewa:A case study of factorization in grammar.Linguistic lnquiry 20,1-50.
- & A.Zaenen.(1990).Deep unaccusativity in LFG.In Dziwirek,K.,P.Farrel,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.),Grammatical relations:A cross-theoretical perspective(pp.45-57).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Bruthiaux,P.(2001).Missing in action:verbal metaphor for information technology.English Study 3,24-30.
Burzio,L.(1986).Italian syntax:A government-binding approach.Dordrecht:Reidel.
Cai,J.T.[蔡金亭].(2000).中国学生英语过渡与中的作格动词。外语教学与研究4,283-289.
Carrier,J.,& J.Randall.(1992).The argument structure and syntactic structure of resultatives.Linguistic Inquiry 23,173-234.
Chafe,W.(1976).Givenness,constrastiveness,definiteness,subjects,topics and point of view.In Charles N.Li(Ed.),Subject and topic(pp.25-55).New York:Academic Press.
-.(1994).Discourse,consciousness and time.Chicago and London:The University of Chicago Press.
Chao,Y.R.(1968).A grammar of spoken Chinese.Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press.
Chen.T.Z.[陈庭珍].(1957),.汉语中处所词做主语的存在句.中国语文8,15-19.
Chierchia,G..,& S.McConnell-Ginet.(1990).Meaning and grammar." an introduction to semantics.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
Chierchia,G.(2004).A semantics of unaccusativity.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity Puzzle:Explorations of the Syntax-Lexicon Interface(pp.22-59).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Chomsky,N.(1957).Syntactic structures.The Hague:Mouton.
-.(1965).Aspects of the theory of syntax.Cambridge:The MIT Press
-.(1981).Lectures on government and binding.Foris:Dordrecht.
-.(1986).Knowledge of language:its nature,origin,and use,New York:Praeger.
-.(1991).Some notes on economy of derivation and representation.In R.Freidin(Ed.),Principles and Parameters in Comparative Syntax(pp.417-454).Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1992).A minimalist program for linguistic theory,Occasional Papers in Linguistics,MIT.
-.(1995).The Minimalist Program.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
Chu,X.Q.[褚孝泉].(2006).论语言学的方法论基础。复旦学报4,127-133.
Comrie,B.(1978).Ergativity.In W.P.Lehmann(Ed.)Syntactic typology:Studies in the phenomenology of language(pp.329-94)Austin:University of Texas Press.
-.(1989).Language universals and linguistic typology:Syntax and morphology,2nd ed.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Coopmans,E(1989).Where stylistic and syntactic processes meet:Locative inversion in English.Language 65(4),728-751.
Croft,W.(1991).Syntactic categories and grammatical relations:The cognitive organization of information.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1994).Voice:beyond control and affectedness.In Barbara Fox and Paul J.Hopper(Eds.)Voice:Form and function(pp.89-117).Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
-.(1998).Event structure in argument linking.In M.Butt and W.Geuder(Eds.),The Projection of arguments(pp.21-64).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
-.(2001).Radical construction grammar.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Croft,W.& E.J.Wood.(2000).Construal operations in linguistics and artificial intelligence.In L.Albertazi(Ed.),Meaning and Cognition:A multidisciplinary approach(pp.51-78).Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Davidse,K.(1992).Yransitivity/ergativity:the Janus-headed grammar of actions and events.In M.,Davies,& L.Ravelli.(Eds.),Advances in Systemic Linguistics:Recent theory and practice(pp.105-135).London:Pinter.
Denison,D.(1985).Why old English had no prepositional passive.English Studies 66,189-204.
Ding.S.S.[丁声树].(1961).现代汉语语法讲话.北京:商务印书馆。
Dixon.R.M.W.,(1979).Ergativity.Language 55,59-138.
-.(1987).Studies in ergativity:introduction.Lingua 71,1-16.
-.(1994).Ergativity.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Dowty,D.(1979).Word meaning and Montague grammar.Dordrecht:Reidel.
-.(1991).Thematic Proto-roles and argument selection.Language 67,547-619.
Dziwirek,K.,P.Farrel,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.).(1990)Grammatical relations:A cross-theoreticalperspective.Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Emonds,Joseph.(1976).A transformational approach to English Syntax.New York:Academic Press.
Eguzkitza,A.,& Kaiser,A.G.(1999).Postverbal subjects in Romance and German:Some notes on the Unaccusative Hypothesis.Lingua 109,195-219.
Fan,F.L.[范方莲].(1957).存在句。中国语文5,386-395
Fiengo,Robert W.(1980).Semantic conditions on surface structure.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,MIT,Cambridge,Mass.
Fillmore,Charles J.(1968).The Case for Case.In E.,Bach & R.T.Harms(Eds.),Universals in Linguistic Theory(pp.1-88).New York:Holt.
-.(1970).The grammar of 'hitting' and 'breaking'.In R.A.,Jacobs & P.S.Rosenbaum(Eds.),Readings in English transformational grammar(pp.120-133).New York:John Wiley.
-.(1977).Scenes and frames semantics.In A.Zampolli,(Ed.),Linguistic structures processing(pp.55-81).Amsterdam:Benjamins.
-.(1985).Syntactic intrusions and the notion of grammatical construction.BLS 11,73-86.
-.(1988).The mechanisms of 'construction grammar'.BLS 14,35-55.
Fillmore,C.J.,P.Kay,& M.C.O'Connor.(1988).Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions:The case of let alone.Language 64,501-38.
Foley,W.A.& R.D.Van Valin,Jr.(1984).Functional syntax and Universal Grammar.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Freeze,Ray.(1992).Existentials and other locatives.Language 68(3),553-595.
Gamon,C.D.(1997).The grammaticalizations of grammatical relations:A typological and historical study involving Kashaya Pomo,Old English and Modern English.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of California,Berkeley.
Gao,M.L.[高明乐].(2004).题元角色的句法实现。北京:中国社会科学出版社。
Gao,Qian.(1996).Resultative verb compounds and Ba-construction in Chinese.Journal of Chinese Linguistics 25,84-130.
Gerdts,D.(1991).Unaccusative mismatches in Halkomelem Salish.International Journal of American Linguistics 57(2),230-250.
Givon,Talmy.(1979).On understanding grammar.New York:Academic Press.
-.(1984).Syntax:A functional-typological introduction,Vol.1.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Goh,G.Y.(2001).The advent of the prepositional passive:An innovation of Middle English? English Studies 3,203-217.
Goldberg,A.E.(1995).Constructions-A constructional grammar approach to argument structure.Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
-.(2002).Construction Grammar.In R.A.Wilson & F.C.Keil(Eds.),Encyclopedia of cognitive science.Macmillan Reference Limited Nature Publishing Group.
-.(2003).Construction:A new theoretical approach to language.Journal of Foreign Languages 3,1-11
-.& R.Jackendoff.(2004).The English resultative as a family of constructions.Language,80(3),532-568.
-,D.Casenhiser,& N.Sethuraman.(2005).A lexically based proposal of argument structure meaning.Journal of Foreign Languages 1,3-13
-.(2006).Constructions at work:the nature of generalization in language.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Gong,Q.Y[龚千炎].(1980),.现代汉语罩的受事主语句。中国语文5,34-39
Grimshaw,J.(1987).Unaccusative-an overview.Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society 17,244-59.
-.(1990).Argument structure.Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press.
Grewendorf,G.(1989).Ergativity in German.Dordrecht:Foris.
Grice,P.(1975).Logic and conversation.In P.Cole & J.Morgan(Eds.),Syntax and semantics 3:Speech acts(pp.41-58).New York:Academic Press.
Gruber,J.S.(1976).Lexical structures in syntax and semantics.Amsterdam:Northe-Holland.
Gu,Y.(1992a).On the locative existential construction in Chinese.In D.Bates(Ed.),10th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics(183-195).Stanford:The Stanford Linguistic Association.
-.(1992b).The syntax of resultative and causative compounds in Chinese.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Comell University.
-.(1997).关于存现结构的理论探讨。现代汉语3,14-25.
Guerssel,M.et al.(1985).A cross-linguistic study of transitivity alternations.Papers from the 21st Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society:Parasession on causatives and agentivity 21(2),48-63
Haegeman,L.(1994).Introduction to Government and Binding Theory.2nd edition.Oxford:Blackwell.
Hale,K.and S.J.Keyser.(1986).Some transitivity alternations in English.Lexicon Project Working Papers 7.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1993).On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations.In K.Hale and S.J.Keyser(Eds.),The view from Building 20(pp.53-109).Cambridge:The MIT Press.
-.(1997).The basic elements of argument structure.Ms.MIT.
-.(2002).Prolegomenon to a theory of argument structure.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
Hall,B.(1965).Subject and object in modern English,MIT dissertation.Published by Garland Publishing,New York,1979,as by Barbara Hall Partee.
Halliday,M.A.K.(1985).An Introduction to functional grammar.1st edition.London:Edward Arnold.
Han,J.Q.[韩景泉].(2000).领有名词提升移位与格理论。现代外语3,261-272.
-.(2001).英汉语存现句的生成句法研究。现代汉语2,143-158。
Haspelmath,M.(1993).More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations.In B.Comrie & M.Polinsky(Eds.).Causatives and transitivity.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
Hartl,H.(2003).Conceptual and grammatical characteristics of argument alternations.Linguistics 41(5),883-916.
Harris,A.1982.Georgian and the unaccusative hypothesis.Language 58,290-306
Hoeskstra,T.(1984).Transitivity:grammatical relations in Government-binding Theory.Dordrecht:Foris.
-.(1988).Small clause results.Lingua 74,101-39.
Hoeskstra,T.,& R.Mulder.(1990).Unergatives as copular verbs:locational and existential predication.The Linguistic Review 7,1-79.
Hopper,P.J.& S.A.Thompson.(1980).Transitivity in grammar and discourse.Language 56,251-99.
Horrocks,G.& M.Stavrou.(2007).Grammaticalized aspect and spatio-temporal culmination.Lingua 117(4),605-644.
Hu,W.Z.[胡文泽].(1995).存现句的时段语义.语言研究2,100-112.
Huang.C.T.[黄正德](1987).Existential Sentence in Chinese and(in)definiteness.In E.Reuland & ter Meulen,A.(Eds.),The representation of(in)definiteness(pp.226-253).Cambridge:MIT Press.
-.(2007)现代汉语的题元结构与句法表现.语言科学4,3-21.
Huang,N.S.[黄南松].(1996).论存在句.汉语学习4,28-32页.
Isaak,A.(2000).Split case marking and prominence relations.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Jackendoff,R.(1972).Semantic interpretation in generative grammar.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1976).Toward an explanatory semantic representation.Linguistic Inquiry 7,89-150.
-.(1983).Semantics and cognition.Cambridge,Massachusetts:MIT Press.
-.(1990).Semantic structures.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1997a).Twistin' the night away.Language 73,534-59.
-.(1997b).The architecture of the language faculty.Cambridge:MIT Press.
Jenkins,L.(1975).The English existential.Niemeyer:Tubingen.
Jesperson,O.(1924).The philosophy of grammar.London:George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
-.(1927).A modern English grammar on historical principles Part Ⅲ:Syntax.Vol.2.Heidelberg:Carl Winters.
-.(1965).A modern English grammar on historical principles,Part Ⅵ,Morphology.London:George Allen and Unwin Ltd.(First published in 1927 by Carl Winter).
Johnson,C.(2000).Constructional grounding:On the relation between deictic and existential there-constructions in acquisition.In A.Cienki,J.Barbara & M.B.Smith(Eds.),Conceptual and discourse factors in linguistic structure(pp.123-136).Stanford:CSLI Publications.
Kay,P.,& C.J.,Fillmore.(1999).Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations:The What's X doing Y construction.Language 75,1-34.
Keller,E.& A.Sorace,2003.Gradient auxiliary selection in German:an experimental investigation.Journal of Linguistics 39(1),57-108.
Keyser,S.J.,& Roeper,T.(1984).On the middle and ergative construction in English,Linguistic Inquiry 15,381-416
Kim,Y.(1997).A situation semantic account of existential sentences.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Stanford University.
Klimov,G.A.(1974).On the character of languages of active typology.Linguistics 131,11-25.
Kuno,S.(1971).The position of locatives in existential sentences.Linguistic Inquiry 2,333-378.
Kuno,S.,& Takami,K.(2004).Functional Constraints in Grammar:On the unergative-unaccusative distinction.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Labelle,M.(1992).Change of state and valency.Journal of Linguistics 28,375-414.
Lakoff,(1(1987).Women,fire and dangerous things.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1996).Sorry,I'm not myself today:The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self.In.(1 Fauehonnier & E.Sweester(Eds.),Spaces,worm and grammar(pp.91-123).Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff,G.& Johnson,Mark.(1999).Philosophy in the flesh.New York:Basic Books.
Lambrecht,K.(1994).Information structure and sentence form:Topic,focus,and the mental representations of discourse referents.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Langaeker.R.W.(1982).Space grammar,analyzability,and the English passive.Language 58,22-80.
-.(1987).Foundations of cognitive grammar.Vol.Ⅰ:Theoretical prerequisite.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
-.(1991).Foundations of cognitive grammar,Vol.Ⅱ:Descriptive application.Stanford:Stanford University Press.
-.(1999).Grammar and conceptualization.Berlin and New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
-.(2000).Why a mind is necessary:Conceptualization,grammar and linguistic semantics.In L.Albertazi(Ed.),Meaning and cognition:,4 multidisciplinary approach(pp.25-38).Amsterdam/Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Larson,R.(1988).On the double object construction.Linguistic Inquiry 19,335-391.
Legendre,G.(1989).Unaccusativity in French.Lingua 79,95-164
-.(2007).On the Typology of auxiliary selection.Lingual 17(9),1522-1540.
Lemmens,M.(1998).Lexical perspectives on transitivity and ergativity.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Levin,B.(1993).English verb classes and alternation:A preliminary investigation.Chicago:Chicago University Press.
Levin,B.,& M.Rappaport.(1989).An approach to unaccusative mismatches.Proceedings of NELS 19,314-328.University of Massachusetts,Amherst.
-.(1994).A preliminary analysis of causative verbs in English.In L.Gleitman & and B.Landau(Eds.)The acquisition of the lexicon(pp,35-77).Cambridge,Mass.:MIT Press.
-.(1995).Unaccusativity:At the syntax-lexical semantics interface.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
-.(2005).Argument realization.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Li.J.L and L.F.Wang.[李京廉,王立非].(2005).英汉存现句的句法研究。现代 汉语4,350-359。
Li,Y.F.(1990).On V-V compounds in Chinese.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8,177-207.
-.(1993).Structural head and aspectuality.Language 69,480-504.
-.(1995).The thematic hierarchy and causativity.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 13,255-282.
-.(1999).Cross-componential causativity.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17,445-497.
Li,Y.H.(1990).Order and constituency in Mandarin Chinese.Dordrecht:Kluwer.
Lightfoot.D.(1979).Principles ofdiachronic syntax.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Liu,F.H.[刘凤樨].(2007).Auxiliary selection in Chinese.In R.Aranovich(Ed.),Split auxiliary systems:A cross-linguistic perspective(pp,181-205).Amsterdam:John Beniamins Publishing Co.
Liu,X.L.[刘晓林].(2007).也谈“王冕死了父亲”的生成方式。中国语文5,440-443.
Lumsden,M.(1988).Existential sentences:Their structure and meaning.London:Croom Helm.
Lv,Y.S.[吕云生].(2005,).有关“施事后置”及“非宾格假说”的几个问题.语言科学4,50-70.
Lyons,C.(1999).Definiteness.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Lyons,J.(1968).Introduction to theoretical linguistics.London:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1977).Semantics Vol.2.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Manning,H.P.(1995).Fluid intransitivity in Middle Welsh:Gradience,typology and 'unaccusativity'.Lingua 97,171-194.
McClure,W.(1990).A lexical semantic explanation for unaccusative mismatches.In K.Dziwirek,P.Farrell,& E.Mejias-Bikandi(Eds.),Grammatical relations:A cross-theoretical perspective(pp.305-318).Stanford,CA:CSLI.
Milsark,G.(1979).Existential sentences in English.New York:Garland.
Miyagawa,S.(1989).Light verbs and the ergative hypothesis.Linguistic Inquiry 20,659-668.
Pan.H.H.[潘海华](1996).Imperfective aspect zhe,agent deletion and locative inversion.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 14,409-432.
Pan,H.H.and J.Q.,Han.[潘海华,韩景泉].(2005).显性非宾格动词结构的句法研究。语言研究3,1-13.
Peeters,B.(1998).Review of B.Levin & M.Rappaport Hovav "Unaccusativity:At the syntax-lexical semantics interface".Word 49(2),300-303.
Perlmutter,D.(1978).Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypotheses.BLS 4,157-89.
-.(1980).Relational grammar.In E.Moravcsik & J.R.Wirth(Eds.),Syntax and semantics 13(pp.195-227).New York:Academic Press.
- & Postal.(Eds.).(1983).Studies in Relational Grammar 1.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-& Postal,P.(1983).'Some proposed laws of basic clause structure'.In Perlmutter and Postal(Eds.),(pp,81-128).
- &Postal,P.(1984).The 1-advancement exclusiveness law.In Perlmutter and Rosen(1984:38-77).
- & Rosen,C.(eds.).(1984).Studies in relational grammar 2.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
-.(1989).Multiattaehment and the unaccusative hypothesis:the perfect auxiliary in Italian.Probus 1,63-119.
Pustejovsky,J.(1995).The generative lexicon.MIT Press:Cambridge,MA.
Pinker,S.(1989).Learnability and cognition:The acquisition of argument structure.MIT Press:Cambridge,MA.
Pollard,C.& I.A.Sag.(1994).Head-driven phrase structure Grammar.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Postal,M.P.(1977).About a nonargument for raising.Linguistic Inquiry 8,141-154.
-.(2004).Skeptical linguistic essays.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Pullum,t2 K.(1988).Citation etiquette beyond thunderdome.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6,579-588.
Rando,E.& D.J.Napoli.(1978).Definites in THERE-sentences.Language 54,300-313.
Rappaport,T.R.(1999).Structure,aspect and predicate.Language 75,653-677.
Rappaport,M.& B.Levin.(1988).What to do with Yheta Roles.In W.Wilkins(Ed.),Syntax and semantics 21:Thematic relations(pp.7-36).San Diego,CA.:Academic Press
-.(2001).An event structure account of English resultatives.Language 77,766-797.
-.(2005).Review ofA.Alexiadou,E Anagnostopoulou & M.Everaert(Eds.),"The Unaccusativity puzzle:explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface".Journal of Linguistics 41,623-629.
Robins,R.H.(1989).General linguistics,4th Edition.London:Longman Group UK Ltd.
Rosen,C.(1984).The interface between semantic roles and initial grammatical relations.In Perlmutter and Rosen(pp,38-77).
Safir,K.(1982).Syntactic chains and the definiteness effect.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,MIT:Cambridge,MA.
Sapir,E.(1917).Review of C.C.Uhlenbeck:Het passieve karakter van her verbum transitivum of van het verbum actionis in Talen van Noord-Amerika.International Journal of American Linguistics 1,82-86.
Schoorlemmer,M.(2004).Syntactic unaccusativity in Russian.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.207-242).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Shaumyan,S.(1987).A Semiotic theory of language.Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
Shi,Y.Z.[石毓智].(2007).语言学假设中的证据问题。语言科学4,39-51.
Shibatani,M.(1976).The grammar of causative constructions:A conspectus.In M.Shitatani(ed.),Syntax and semantics,Vol.6:The grammar of causative constructions(pp.1-40).New York:Academic Press.
-.(1985).Passives and related constructions:A prototype analysis.Language 61,821-848.
Shen,Y,Y.J.He and Y Gu.[沈阳,何元建,顾阳].(2001).生成语法理论与汉语语法研究.哈尔滨:黑龙江教育出版社。
Simpson,J.(1983).Resultatives.In L.Levin,M.Rappaport & Zaenen(Eds.),Papers in lexical-functional grammar(pp.143-157).Indiana University Linguistics Club:Bloomington,
Smith,C.S.1970.Jespersen's 'Move and Change' class and causative verbs in English.In A.J.Mohammad,E.C.Polome & W.Winter(Eds.),Linguistic and literary studies in honor of Archibald A.Hill 2:descriptive linguistics(pp.101-9).Mouton:The Hague.
Sode,R.(1995).Intentionality and VN-suru constructions in Japanese.The Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 29(2),22-54.
Song,W.H.[宋文辉].(2006,).自动动结式的使动化。语文研究与探索(十三)pp.113-127.
Sorace,A.(1995).Acquiring linking rules and argument structures in a second language:the unaccusative/unergative distinction.In:L.Eubank,L.Selinker & M.Sharwood-Smith(Eds.),The current state of interlanguage(pp.153-175).Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
-.(2000).Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs.Language 76(4),859-890
-.(2004).Gradience at the lexicon-syntax interface:Evidence from auxiliary selection and implications for unaccusativity.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle." Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.243-268).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Sybesma,Rint.1999.The Mandarin VP.Dordrecht,The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tai,J.(1984).Verbs and times in Chinese:Vendler's four categories.Parasession on lexical semantics 20,289-296.Chicago:Chicago Linguistic Society.
Talmy,L.(1985a).Lexicalization patterns:Semantic structure in lexical forms.In T.Shopen(Ed.),Language typology and syntactic description,Vol.3:Grammatical categories and the lexicon(pp.57-149).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1985b).Force dynamics in language and thought.Parasession on causatives and agentivity 21(1),293-337.Chicago:Chicago Linguistic Society.
-.(2000a).Cognitive semantics,Vol.1.Cambridge:MIT Press.
-.(2000b).Cognitive semantics,Vol.2.Cambridge:MIT Press.
Tang,T.Ch.[汤廷池].(2002),汉语复合动词的“使动”与“起动”交替”.语言暨语言学3,615-644.
Tang Y.-Z.[唐玉柱].(2001).存在句中的there.《现代汉语》1,23-33.
-.(2005).存现动词的非宾格性假设。重庆大学学报(社科版)4,84-87
Tenny,C.(1994).Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface.Kluwer:Dordrecht.
Thompson,G.(1996).Introducing functional grammar.London:Arnold.
Thompson,S.(1973).Resultative verb compounds in Mandarin Chinese:A case for lexical rules.Language 49,361-379.
Tsunoda,T.(1994).Transitivity.In R.E.Asher et al.(Eds.)The Encyclopedia of language and linguistics 9,4670-77.Oxford:Pergaman press.
-.(1999).Transitivity and intransitivity.Journal of Asian and African Studies 57,1-9.
Van Hout,A.(2004).Unaccusativity as Telicity Checking.In A.Alexiadou,E.Anagnostopoulou,& M.Everaert.(Eds.),The Unaccusativity puzzle:Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface(pp.22-59).Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Van Voorst,J.(1995).The semantic structure of causative constructions.Studies in Language 19,489-523
van Valin,R.D.(1990).Semantic parameters of split intransitivity.Language 66(2),221-260.
- & Lapolla,R.(1997).Syntax:structure,meaning and function.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
-.(1999).Generalized semantic roles and the syntax-semantics interface,In F.Corblin,C.Dobrovie-Sorin & J.M.Marandin,(Eds.),Empirical issues informal syntax and semantics 2(pp.373-389).The Hague:Thesus.
Vendler,Z.(1967).Linguistics in philosophy.Ithaca,NY:Comell University Press.
Wang,J.W.[王建伟](2007a).计算机带来的新兴非宾格现象。外语与翻译2,1-6.
-.(2007b),.从“非完成态悖论”的解决方案看汉语中的”完成态悖论”.现代外语1.51-56.
Wang,L.D.[王立弟].(2003).论元结构新论。北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
Wang,Z.J.[王志军].(2004).英汉被动句认知对比研究。上海:上海外语教育出版社。
Wen,B.L.[温宾利].(2002).当代句法学导论。北京:外语教学与研究出版社。
Wen,B.L.&Chen,Z.L.[温宾利、陈宗利].(2001).领有名词移位:基于MP的分析。现代外语4,412-416.
Whaley,L.(1997).An introduction to typology." The unity and diversity of language.Thousand Oaks:Sage.
White,L.(2003).Second language acquisition and Universal Grammar.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Williams,E.(1980).Predication.Linguistic Inquiry 11,203-238.
-.(1984).There-insertion.Linguistic lnquiry 15,131-153.
-.(1997).Review of Beth Levin & Malka Rappaport Hovav:Unaccusativity:at the syntax-lexical interface.Journal of Linguistics 33,595-600.
Woolford,E.(1997).Four-way case systems:Ergative,nominative,objective,and accusative.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 15,181-227.
Wright,S.(2001).Internally and externally caused change of state verbs.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,Northwestern University.Evanston.
Xia,X.R.[夏晓蓉].(2001).英汉V+R结构与非宾格现象。外语教学与研究 3,172-177.
Xiong,X.L.,&X.B.,Liang,[熊学亮,梁晓波].(2004).致使结构英汉表达异同。外语教学与研究3,90-96
Xu,J.[徐杰].(1999).两种保留宾语句式及相关句法理论问题。当代语言学1,16-29.
-.(2001).“及物性”特征及相关的四类动词。语言研究3,1-10.
Yan,C.S.[严辰松].(2006).构式语法论要。解放军外国语学院学报4,6-11
Yang,S.-Y.[杨素英].(1999).从非宾格现象看语义与句法结构之间的关系。当代语言学1,30-43
Yang,S.Y&H.H.Pan[杨素英,潘海华].(2001).A constructional analysis of the existential structure.In Pan,H.H.(Ed.),Studies in Chinese linguistics Ⅱ(pp.189-208).Hong Kong:Linguistic Society of Hong Kong.
Yang,S.-Y.,et al.[杨素英等].(2007).汉语作为第二语言存现句习得研究。汉语学习1,59-70.
Yip,M.,J.Maling,& R.Jackendoff.(1987).Case in tiers.Language 63,217-250.
Yip,V.(1995).Interlanguage and learnability:From Chinese to English.Amsterdam:John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Yuan,B.-P.[袁博平].(2002).汉语中的两种不及物动词与汉语第二语言习得。世界汉语教学3,91-101.
Yu,J.Y[俞建耀].(2006).英语非宾格动词在外语习得过程中的被动泛化综合解释。西安外国语学院学报3,40-43.
Zaenen,A.(1988).Unaccusative verbs in Dutch and the syntax-semantics interface.CSLI Report No.CSLI-88-123.Stanford:CSLI.
-.(1993).Unaccusativity in Dutch:Integrating syntax and lexical semantics.In J.Pustejovsky(Ed.),Semantics and lexicon(pp.129-161).Dordrecht:Kluwer.
Zhan,R.F.[詹人凤].(1989).动结式短语的表述问题.中国语文2,105-111
Zhao,Y.C.[赵彦春].(2001).Burzio内论元说证伪。现代汉语2,133-142
-.(2002).作格动词与存现结构症结。外语学刊2,63-67
Zhou,X.P.(1990).Aspects of Chinese syntax:Ergativity and phrase Structure.Unpublished doctoral dissertation,University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Zobl,H.(1989).Canonical typological structures and ergativity in English L2 acquisition.In S.Gass & J.Sehachter.(Eds.),Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition(pp.203-221).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.