從認知語法和類型學的角度看上古漢語中“V＋于＋IO”的與格結構

The yu-dative Construction “V+yu+IO” in Archaic Chinese: A Cognitive Typological Perspective

本文首先從事實的層面質疑過去把上古漢語中兩種和“于＂有關的與格結構，即“V＋于＋IO＂和“V＋DO＋于＋IO＂，分析為具有相同語義結構的做法。接著，本文也進一步從認知語法的理論角度說明這兩個句式雖然具有相同的認知基底，但是由於它們都勾勒了同一個認知基底的不同側面，因此兩者的語義結構是不同的。本文接著嘗試從認知語法和語義地圖的角度對上古漢語中的“V＋于＋IO＂句式所呈現出的語義結構做出討論。通過這個討論，我們發現“V＋于＋IO＂與“V＋DO＋于＋IO＂在同一張語義地圖上佔據了不同的連續區域，這除了進一步說明了“V＋于＋IO＂與“V＋DO＋于＋IO＂的語義結構不同外，也說明了這種語義結構的不同對“V＋于＋IO＂的語義擴展具有決定性的影響。

This paper argues against the received view that the two yu-dative constructions in Archaic Chinese, viz. “V+yu+IO” and “V+DO+yu+IO” have the same semantic structure by offering several empirical observations to show that this derivation hypothesis is suspicious. Moreover, this paper also demonstrates that even though the two yu-dative constructions make reference to the same conceptual content, their profiles are different. Hence, in accordance with the preliminaries of Cognitive Grammar, “V+yu+IO” and “V+DO+yu+IO” differ semantically. This paper further explores the semantic structure of “V+yu+IO” in Archaic Chinese from both Cognitive Grammar and Semantic Map perspectives. It will be demonstrated that the semantic extensions exhibited by both “V+yu+IO” and “V+DO+yu+IO” constructions occupy different contiguous areas on a single semantic map, which further justifies the idea that the semantic structure of the “V+yu+IO” construction, which is different from that of “V+DO+yu+IO”, assumes an important role in determining its own extensions, which include the comitativeexperiencer, instrumental, passive, and comparative constructions.