「本來」為相對過去標記－－相對語義、錨點時間及不持續性

Benlai as a Relative Past Marker-- Contrastive Semantics, Anchor Time and Discontinuity Reading

「本來」可以當副詞或形容詞使用，不管是當副詞或形容詞，在某些情況下「本來」可以有「不連續」的語意，但是在其他情形下卻不能。我們認為，「本來」必須在命題在不同時間上是否成立顯示對比。「本來」在被動詞帶為論元的論元時間之前找出一個時間，並宣稱其所引領之命題在這個過去時間為真。如果文章脈絡中已有該命題在稍後之時間方成立的訊息並暗示其在稍早之時間並不成立，則「本來」標示該命題在過去時間為真，以為對比；如篇章脈絡中沒有任何該命題於何時成立之訊息，則「本來」標示命題在論元時間不成立，以在過去時間成立但在論文時間不成立來滿足對比要求。至於「本來」當形容詞用時，我們接受名詞亦帶時間論元的說法，並提出，漢語名詞可分兩類：一類允許性質改變，一類不允許。「本來」修飾前者時，可以獲得「不連續」的語意，但修飾後者時不行。我們提出，形容詞「本來」與副詞「本來」的語意完全相同，僅差別在所修飾的成分不同。另外，我們也提出，「本來」可以視為一種相對過去的標記，因為「本來」標示其所修飾之命題或名詞在一過去時間為真。

Benlai can function as an adverbial and as an adjective. As an adverbial, it sometimes has a discontinuity reading while at other times it does not. As an adjective, benlai exhibits the same semantic behavior. We argue that benlai shows contrast depending on whether a proposition holds at different times; it provides an extra time located in the past of the argument time (a time taken as an argument by a verb, which is by default instantiated to the time of utterance), and specifies that the proposition it introduces holds at the extra time. When the context indicates that a proposition benlai presents holds only at a latter time, not at an earlier time, benlai indicates that this proposition also holds at the argument time because the contrast requirement has been contextually satisfied. When the context does not rovide any contrastive information, benlai then indicates that the proposition does not hold at the argument time, and the sentence thus receives a discontinuity reading. We also argue that the fact benlai shows contrast on different elements inside a VP comes from the interaction of negation and different focused elements and hence is not part of the semantics of benlai. As for adjectival benlai, following the argument that nouns also take a time argument, we argue that, in Mandarin, some nouns have a temporal constraint, ruling out the possibility for these nouns to refer to a change from “being a property” to “not being a property”, while other nouns do not have this kind of constraint. When benlai modifies nouns of the former type, no discontinuity reading can be derived because of the temporal constraint; when benlai modifies nouns of the latter type, a discontinuity reading is derived. We furthermore propose that benlai serves as a relative past marker, because it asserts a time located in the past of another time, which a verb takes as an argument in its semantics, and indicates that whatever benlai modifies holds at the extra time.