Класифікація засобів реалізації семантики каузальності в сучасній китайській мові

O. Yu.  Dalte

doi:10.32589/2311-0821.2.2023.297663

Authors

O. Yu. Dalte Kyiv National Linguistic University, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5280-4279

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32589/2311-0821.2.2023.297663

Keywords:

causality, causative construction, corpus linguistics, Sketch Engine, Chinese Web 2017 (zhTenTen17) Simplified Corpus, modern Chinese

Abstract

The article presents a model for applying methods of corpus linguistics to the categorization of causatives that convey semantics of causality in contemporary Chinese. The author employs the core functions of the corpus manager Sketch Engine, including thesaurus, concordance and word list in order to select contextual synonyms, search to find illustrative material and generate lexical units with preset parameters accordingly. Specifically, online corpus of Chinese Web 2017 (zhTenTen17) Simplified, which contains approximately 16.6 billion tokens, was used to conduct the study.
Notably, in modern Chinese, the category of causality is primarily realized through causative constructions, which/whose type is determined by the causative predicate. The present paper studies both lexical and grammatical causatives. The results illustrate that lexical causatives include mono- and
multi-component types, while grammatical causatives are divided into those formed by two full verbs; those formed by a full verb and a resultative component; and those formed by a combination of light and non-causative verbs. Besides, grammatical causative constructions are divided into two main subtypes: morphological and analytical. The morphological one conveys semantics of causality either through causative affixes or phonological changes, while the analytical one being the most prevalent in modern Chinese are further classified into three models, namely: those formed with causative markers; those formed with the causative preposition 把; and those formed with the word 得. Future research may focus on the pragmatics of the choice in different types of causative constructions, with a regard to the conceptual and linguistic worldview of the Chinese people.

References

Далте, О. Ю. (2022). Актуальний стан дослідження каузативів у сучасній китайській мові. У А. О. Решетник (Ред.) Ad orbem per linguas. До світу через мови. (с. 65–67). Видавничий центр Київського національного лінгвістичного університету.

Далте, О. Ю. (2023). Комплексний підхід до вивчення семантики каузальності крізь призму філософських та лінгвістичних студій. Закарпатські філологічні студії, 27(1), 141–146.

https://doi.org/10.32782/tps2663-4880/2022.27.1.24

Кіктенко, В. О. (2006). Даоська причинність і телеологія: Нідэм, Гегель, Уатхед і комбінаторна логіка. Вісник Київського національного університету ім. Тараса

Шевченка. Філософія. Політологія, 79(1), 190-194.

http://history.org.ua/JournALL/orientworld/orientworld_2005_1/orientworld_2005_1.

pdf#page=165

Кучман, І. М. (2012). Лінгвістичний і лінгвальний статус категорії каузативності. Філологічні трактати, 4(4), 46-55.

http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/30082

Любимова, Ю. С. (2017). Спонукальні дієслова як домінанта реалізації семантики імперативності в сучасній китайській мові. Південний архів (філологічні

науки), 71(1), 100–103.

https://pa.journal.kspu.edu/index.php/pa/article/view/331

Шаталович, І. В. (2019). Трансформація ідеї детермінізму в західноєвропейській філософії. Вісник ХНПУ імені Г.С. Сковороди: Серія «Філософія», 1(41), 160-170.

http://www.irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/cgi-bin/irbis_nbuv/cgiirbis_64.exe?C21COM=2&I2

DBN=UJRN&P21DBN=UJRN&IMAGE_FILE_DOWNLOAD=1&Image_file_

name=PDF/VKhnpu_filos_2013_41(1)__18.pdf

Basciano, B. (2013). Causative light verbs in Mandarin Chinese (and beyond). Morphology in Toulouse. Selected Proceedings of Décembrettes, 7(1), 57-89.

https://www.academia.edu/1206468/Causative_light_verbs_in_Mandarin_Chinese_and_beyond_

Bruya, B. (2022). Ziran: The philosophy of spontaneous self-causation. State University of New York Press.

Choonharuangdej, S. (2008). The usage of causatives in classical Chinese: A review. Manusya: Journal of Humanities, 11(1), 1–16.

http://www.manusya.journals.chula.ac.th/files/essay/Suree_p1-16.pdf

Comrie, B. (1974). Causatives and universal grammar. Transactions of the philological society, 73(1), 1–32.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1974.tb01155.x

Czeżowski, T. (2022). How did the problem of causality arise? An outline of its development in ancient philosophy. In The Concept of Causality in the Lvov-Warsaw School (pp. 139–176). Brill.

https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004522244_005

Dalte, O. (2023). Hyper-hyponymic relationships between paronymic terms «causal» and «causative»: corpora-based verification. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “Modern Science: Processes of Globalization and Transformation” (pp. 489–491). Latvia: Baltija Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-309-5-36

Dixon, R. (2000). A Typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. RMW Dixon & AY Aikhenwald.

Effendi, I. S., Amalia, R., & Lalita, S. A. (2020). Are synonyms always synonymous? A corpus-assisted approach to announce, declare, and state. ASIAN TEFL Journal of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 1-20.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Are-Synonyms-Always-Synonymous-A-Corpusassisted-to-Effendi-Amalia/e02ec26a1010e2fdf1c66170e93134f2806cd650?p2df

Evangelidis, B. (2020). Reason, causation and compatibility with the phenomena. Vernon Press.

Huang, L. (2021). Toward multimodal corpus pragmatics: Rationale, case, and agenda. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 36(1), 101–114.

https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqz080

Kapranov, Y. (2022). Antconc corpus manager and its possibilities for keywords with resilience semantics search. In R. Vasko (ed.) Language. Culture. Discourse (pp. 22–32). Kharkiv: PC Technology Center.

http://doi.org/10.15587/978-617-7319-60-2.2

Kilgarriff, A., Marcowitz, F., Smith, S., & Thomas, J. (2015). Corpora and language learning with the Sketch Engine and SKELL. Revue française de linguistique appliquée, 20(1), 61–80.

https://www.cairn.info/revue-francaise-de-linguistique-appliquee-2015-1-page-61.htm

Kyrysiuk, A. (2022). Lexico-semantic graphs as formalized schemes of reflection of fragment of reality in human consciousness. In R. Vasko (ed.) Language. Culture.

Discourse (pp. 5-21). Kharkiv: PC Technology Center.

http://doi.org/10.15587/978-617-7319-60-2.1

Shibatani, M., & Pardeshi, P. (2002). The causative continuum. Typological studies in language, 48(1), 85–126.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/29688530

Sun,Y. (2017). Positive language transfer of causative verbs in Chinese-Portuguese simultaneous interpretations. Letras de Hoje, 52(1), 322–330.

https://doi.org/10.15448/1984-7726.2017.3.29364

Vainorenie, I. P., & Lemish, N. Ye. (2020). Multidisciplinary aspects of causality as an ontological and epistemological category. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 9(1), 305–314.

https://doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v9i1.2472

Xiao, H., Li, F., Sanders, T. J., & Spooren, W. P. (2021). How subjective are Mandarin REASON connectives? A corpus study of spontaneous conversation, microblog and newspaper discourse. Language and Linguistics, 22(1), 167–212.

https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00080.xia

Yao, J. (2022). On causatives: A comparison between European Portuguese and Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics, 21(1), 1–37.

https://doi.org/10.16995/jpl.5888

丁新峰. (2019). 现代汉语致使语义范畴研究. [D]. 吉林大学. DOI: 10.15936/j.cnki.1008-3758.2019.06.013

梅祖麟. (1991). 从汉代的 “动杀” “动死” 来看动补结构的发展. [J]. 语言学论丛， 16(1)

， 169-171. https://www.hanspub.org/reference/Reference.aspx?ReferenceID=25470

杨江锋.(2022).汉语迂回致使结构的多维度研究. 中国社会科学出版社.