馬志剛
廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)
英語(yǔ)主、賓語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)的用例辨析及其格位賦值的最簡(jiǎn)機(jī)制研究*
——基于探針-目標(biāo)關(guān)系理論的句法一致性分析
馬志剛
廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)
英語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)能否通過(guò)移位的方式生成,其中所假定的空主語(yǔ)PRO能否被拷貝所替代是近期相關(guān)研究爭(zhēng)論的焦點(diǎn)問(wèn)題。Landau(2013)基于眾多實(shí)證語(yǔ)料支持PRO的存在,而最簡(jiǎn)句法理論不僅為PRO提供了專屬的格位,而且將其格位賦值機(jī)制納入到探針-目標(biāo)一致關(guān)系的理論框架中,從而使得主格、賓格和空格的指派機(jī)制達(dá)到了句法理論的一致化要求。文章通過(guò)對(duì)英語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)以及相關(guān)結(jié)構(gòu)的用例分析指出,最簡(jiǎn)句法的特征傳遞機(jī)制有助于建立功能語(yǔ)類之間的句法依存關(guān)系,而語(yǔ)段中心語(yǔ)的(不)可解讀特征是未來(lái)研究區(qū)分限定性和非限定性結(jié)構(gòu)時(shí)應(yīng)該優(yōu)先考慮的重要因素之一。
最簡(jiǎn)方案,控制結(jié)構(gòu),空主語(yǔ)PRO,格位賦值,一致關(guān)系
英語(yǔ)中作補(bǔ)語(yǔ)的從句可區(qū)分為限定句和非限定句。限定從句的典型代表如(1)a中的劃線部分所示,其中的主語(yǔ)具有主格;而非限定從句包括由標(biāo)句詞for引導(dǎo)的不定式結(jié)構(gòu)、控制結(jié)構(gòu)、ECM結(jié)構(gòu)和提升結(jié)構(gòu)等,如(1)b-(1)e所示。其中,(1)b和(1)d中的非限定從句的主語(yǔ)均為賓格,而(1)c和(1)e中的非限定從句并不具有顯性主語(yǔ)。
(1) a.We think that she likes Jack.
b.He planned for me to stay.
c.Lisa managed to leave immediately.
d.Mary suspected him to be innocent.
e.He appeared to be happy.
通常認(rèn)為,限定從句和非限定從句之間最為顯著的形式區(qū)別在于是否允準(zhǔn)主格主語(yǔ)(Culicover 1997)。從管約論的視角看,限定從句的中心范疇I(yíng)NFL具有時(shí)態(tài)特征和一致性特征,因此可以給標(biāo)示語(yǔ)成分指派主格,而非限定從句的INFL(即不定式標(biāo)記to)不具有時(shí)態(tài)特征和一致性特征,因而無(wú)力指派格位(Haegeman 1994)。文獻(xiàn)中有關(guān)非限定從句的爭(zhēng)論主要集中在如下幾個(gè)方面(Davies & Dubinsky 2004):(1)b-e所示的四類非限定從句中是否全都具有主語(yǔ)?(如果有)其主語(yǔ)獲得何種格位以及該格位是如何指派的?非限定從句能否和限定從句共享同一套生成機(jī)制?二者主語(yǔ)的格位指派是否是基于相同的結(jié)構(gòu)關(guān)系得以實(shí)現(xiàn)?
對(duì)上述問(wèn)題的回答關(guān)涉到生成語(yǔ)法的一致性原則以及功能語(yǔ)類的核心句法地位,而本文正是在探針-目標(biāo)一致關(guān)系的理論框架下(Chomsky 2007,2013,2014),試圖提出一種統(tǒng)一的分析方案來(lái)探討上述(1)a類限定句、(1)b類for-to不定式結(jié)構(gòu)和(1)c類控制結(jié)構(gòu)中從句的句法特點(diǎn)以及其中主語(yǔ)的格位指派問(wèn)題。同時(shí),本文將基于語(yǔ)段理論(Chomsky 2008,2014)對(duì)相關(guān)的句法現(xiàn)象提出原則性解釋。
2.1 主語(yǔ)控制和for-to不定式
英語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)的主要句法特點(diǎn)就是其不定式補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句并無(wú)顯性主語(yǔ),依據(jù)其中被控制成分的語(yǔ)義指向,可以將其劃分為主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)和賓語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)。例(2)是典型的主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)(賓語(yǔ)控制的討論詳見下文):
(2) a.John tried / managed to please us.
b.John decided / neglected to please us.
c.John tried / decided [CPPRO to please us]
d.*John tried / decidedhim/heto please us. (2)a和(2)b都屬于主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu),其中不定式句的動(dòng)詞please應(yīng)該具備的外論元在語(yǔ)義所指方面與主句主語(yǔ)一致,因此稱為主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)。如(2)c所示,主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)中的空代詞PRO屬于作主語(yǔ)的隱含性論元。而(2)d顯示,該主語(yǔ)如果顯性呈現(xiàn)就會(huì)導(dǎo)致控制結(jié)構(gòu)形成不合法的句子。(3)中的arrange和plan進(jìn)一步說(shuō)明了主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)的這個(gè)句法特點(diǎn):
(3) a. John arranged to visit the dentist.
b.*John arranged them to visit the dentist.
c. John planned to visit the dentist.
d.*John planned them to visit the dentist.
e. John arranged / planned [CPPRO to visit the dentist]
顯然,作為主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的arrange和plan要求其不定式補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句中的主語(yǔ)只能是(3)e中的空代詞PRO,其所指由主句主語(yǔ)John控制(與其同指)。那么能否據(jù)此認(rèn)為,arrange和plan具有完全相同的句法表現(xiàn)? (4)中的語(yǔ)料和分析的確支持這個(gè)觀察:
(4) a.*They are arranged by John to visit the dentist.
b.*They are planned by John to visit the dentist.
c. John arranged for her to visit the dentist.
d. John planned for her to visit the dentist.
e. John arranged / planned [CP[Cfor][TPher to visit the dentist]]
f. What they arranged / planned was to (for her) visit the dentist.
g.*John tried / managed for Mary to visit his parents.
(4)a和(4)b都不允準(zhǔn)被動(dòng)化,說(shuō)明arrange和plan都是完整的CP語(yǔ)段,其中心語(yǔ)成分統(tǒng)制域內(nèi)的任何成分都不能被移動(dòng)到句首(PIC)(Chomsky 2008)。再者,(4)c 和(4)d表明,arrange和plan都允準(zhǔn)for-to不定式句作為其補(bǔ)語(yǔ)。因此,二者補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句的內(nèi)部構(gòu)造正如(4)e所示,不定式句主語(yǔ)her的賓格是由及物性標(biāo)句詞for指派的。另外,(4)f說(shuō)明,arrange和plan的不定式補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句可以是主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu),也可以是for-to不定式結(jié)構(gòu)。這一點(diǎn),不同于try類控制動(dòng)詞,如(4)g所示。那么其他控制類動(dòng)詞是否可以采用for-to不定式結(jié)構(gòu)作其補(bǔ)語(yǔ)?以下對(duì)attempt 和need的用法加以比較。
(5) a. Christofer attemped to reach the summit.
b. Christofer needed to reach the summit.
c. What Christofer attempted is to reach the summit.
d. What Christofer needed is to reach the summit.
e. Christofer attemped / needed [CPPRO to reach the summit].
(5)a和(5)b、(5)c和(5)d說(shuō)明,attempt和need 都是典型的主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞,因此其補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句的內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)理應(yīng)如(5)e所示。但這是否說(shuō)明二者的句法表現(xiàn)完全一致?如下我們通過(guò)為補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句添加顯性主語(yǔ)來(lái)加以檢驗(yàn):
(6) a.*Jennifer attempted him to please us.
b. Jennifer needed him to examiner her.
c.*Jennifer needed for him to examined her.
d. He was needed by Jennifer to examine her.
e. Jennifer needed there to be an examination.
f.*Jennifer attempted for him to examiner her.
(6)a和(6)b之間的對(duì)比顯示,need似乎具有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法,(6)c不合法,說(shuō)明need不能以for-to不定式句為其補(bǔ)語(yǔ),而(6)d的被動(dòng)化合法、(6)e的虛指詞檢驗(yàn)也合法,說(shuō)明need除了具有主語(yǔ)控制的用法外還具有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法。(6)a和(6)f顯示,attempt既沒(méi)有ECM的用法,也不能以for-to不定式句為其補(bǔ)語(yǔ),而只有(5)a所示的主語(yǔ)控制的用法。英語(yǔ)中類似于attempt和need的動(dòng)詞還有propose和choose,如(7)所示。
(7) a. Jennifer proposed to cancel the program.
b. Jennifer chose to cancel the program.
c. What Jennifer proposed / chose is to cancel the program.
d. Jennifer proposed / chose [CPPRO to cancel the program].
e.*Jennifer proposed (for) him to cancel the program.
f. Jennifer chose him to be the monitor.
盡管choose也具有和need類似的句法表現(xiàn),但二者的用法還是有差別的:need具有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法(如上所述),而choose卻不具有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法,如(8)所示:
(8) a. The doctor was needed to examine her.
b. Jim was chosen to be the monitor.
c. This spinster badly needed there to be a suitor.
d.*That spinster unwillingly chose there to be a suitor.
盡管choose和need都可以具有被動(dòng)化形式(8)a和(8)b,但從(8)c和(8)d的對(duì)比中可以看出,need可以以帶虛指詞的不定式句為其補(bǔ)語(yǔ),而choose則不能。這說(shuō)明可以被動(dòng)化的choose不是ECM動(dòng)詞,而是英語(yǔ)中的另外一類動(dòng)詞(賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞)。在說(shuō)明英語(yǔ)賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的用法之前,有必要對(duì)另外一組主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的用法加以說(shuō)明。
(9) a. The customer demanded to see the manager.
b. The customer requested to see the manager.
c.*The customer demanded him to see the manager.
d. The customer requested him to see the manager.
(9)a和(9)b顯示,demand和request都具有主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的用法,但(9)c和(9)d的對(duì)比說(shuō)明,request可能有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法,而demand則沒(méi)有。
(10) a.*He was demanded to see the manager.
b. He was requested to see the manager.
c .*She demanded / requested for him to enter into the contest.
d. She demanded / requested that he should enter into the contest.
(10)a和(10)b之間的對(duì)比進(jìn)一步說(shuō)明, 不能執(zhí)行被動(dòng)化的demand具有主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的用法,而request可以被動(dòng)化,因此隸屬ECM類動(dòng)詞。(10)c和(10)d說(shuō)明,二者的補(bǔ)語(yǔ)均不可以標(biāo)句詞for引導(dǎo),但可以用that引導(dǎo)。以下討論英語(yǔ)中具有賓語(yǔ)控制用法的動(dòng)詞及其與ECM動(dòng)詞的關(guān)聯(lián)性,以及二者被動(dòng)化的用法。
2.2 賓語(yǔ)控制、ECM及其被動(dòng)化
上文中的用法對(duì)比說(shuō)明,可以以不定式結(jié)構(gòu)為補(bǔ)語(yǔ)的英語(yǔ)動(dòng)詞中包括ECM動(dòng)詞和賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞,而這兩種動(dòng)詞都允準(zhǔn)補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句的主語(yǔ)被動(dòng)化為主句的主語(yǔ)。(11)中的例句是對(duì)這兩類動(dòng)詞的用法對(duì)比:
(11) a. We believe him to be innocent.
b. We told him to leave the campus.
c. He is believed to be innocent.
d. He was told to leave the campus.
e. We believe there to be a party.
f.* He told there to be a party.
英語(yǔ)中典型的ECM動(dòng)詞believe和典型的賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞tell之間的用法異同呈現(xiàn)在(11)中,特別是(11)f說(shuō)明tell不是ECM動(dòng)詞。不過(guò)有些通常被視為賓語(yǔ)控制類的動(dòng)詞似乎也可以有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法,如(12)顯示,order、require、urge就是如此:
(12) a.The general ordered the soldiers to launch an attack.
b.The professor required the students to show more devotion.
c.The Marshall ordered there to be a surprising attack.
d.The general required there to be sufficient ammunition.
e.The president urged the secretary to get ready for the press conference.
f.The president urged there to be a timely press conference.
需要注意的是,英語(yǔ)中的一些賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞似乎可以表達(dá)主語(yǔ)控制句的語(yǔ)義,因而具有歧義性解讀,典型代表如(13)所示的ask和beg:
(13) a.I asked the guard to smoke a cigar.
b.I begged the guard to smoke a cigar.
c.I asked / begged the guard [CP[CΦ][TPPRO [Tto] [VPsmoke a cigar]]]
d.John asked/begged the guard to be allowed to smoke a cigar.
通常認(rèn)為,(13)a和(13)b中主句動(dòng)詞的賓語(yǔ)the guard控制著(13)c中的空代詞PRO的語(yǔ)義所指,但二者均可以理解為(13)d中的語(yǔ)義,而(13)d的內(nèi)部構(gòu)造如(13)e所示,其中空代詞PRO的語(yǔ)義控制者是距離其最近的拷貝成分John。另外,英語(yǔ)中的permit和invite也都具有賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的句法表現(xiàn)。
(14) a. The president permitted us to have a luncheon.
b. The president invited us to have a luncheon.
c. The president permitted / invited us [CP[CΦ][TPPRO [Tto] have a luncheon]].
d. We are permitted / invited by the president to have a luncheon.
e.*The president permitted / invited there to be a luncheon.
從(14)a的語(yǔ)義解讀看,其中補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句中的空代詞PRO(即(14)c)通常的解讀均為permit的賓語(yǔ)us;而對(duì)于invite而言, (14)c中PRO的解讀則應(yīng)該具有聯(lián)合控制(joint control)的可能性,即是invited的主語(yǔ)和賓語(yǔ)一起作為PRO的先行語(yǔ)。而(14)e說(shuō)明,這兩個(gè)動(dòng)詞都不具有ECM動(dòng)詞的用法,盡管二者都允準(zhǔn)(14)d中的被動(dòng)化。
就英語(yǔ)中的賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞而言,具有三元結(jié)構(gòu)而且其不定式句的主語(yǔ)必定為主句動(dòng)詞的題元成分(通常為有心智的生命體)是其句法語(yǔ)義方面的定義性特征。因此,在句法檢測(cè)中,不定式句的主語(yǔ)位置上既不能有虛指詞there / it,也不能使用表天氣的it。以下對(duì)意義較為接近的另一組賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞convince和persuade的用法加以比較:
(15) a. Tom convinced Jack to give a lecture on Nano-Syntax.
b. Tom persuaded Jack to give a lecture on Nano-Syntax.
c.*John convinced that Bill should give a talk on Mini-Semantics.
d.*John persuaded that Bill should give a talk on Mini-Semantics.
e. John convinced Bill that he(Bill) should study Max-Pragmatics..
f. John persuaded Bill that he(Bill) should study Max-Pragmatics
g. Bill was convinced / persuaded by Bill that he(Bill) should study General-Linguistics.
但并非所有的賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞都具有(15)中的全部用法,比如force就不具有(15)e-f中的用法:*George forced Mary that she should marry nobody.而persuade具有的一種用法為:I persuaded Mary that Bill left the room(Poole 2011:106)。需要特別指出的是,控制結(jié)構(gòu)中(無(wú)論是主語(yǔ)控制還是賓語(yǔ)控制),其不定式補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句中的動(dòng)詞通常并不具有時(shí)態(tài)變化,而表達(dá)情態(tài)的動(dòng)詞則經(jīng)??梢猿霈F(xiàn)。(16)b就是典型例證。
(16) a. The general commanded / allow / instruct / encourage the soldiers to charge.
b.*The general commanded / allow / instruct / encourage the soldiers to have withdrawn.
c.*The general commanded / allow / instruct / encourage there to be a cease-fire.
d.*The general commanded / allow / instruct / encourage to forge ahead.
就(16)中的動(dòng)詞而言,(16)b-d顯示其并非ECM動(dòng)詞亦非主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞,而是典型賓語(yǔ)控制類動(dòng)詞,如(16)a所示。
最后,英語(yǔ)中還存在既可以有主語(yǔ)控制的用法又可以有提升用法的一類動(dòng)詞。比如,begin和threaten就是典型代表,其主語(yǔ)控制用法呈現(xiàn)在(17)中(其提升用法將另文專題討論)。
(17) a. The lawyer began to irritate the defendant.
b. The terrorist threatened to drown the informant.
c. They began / threatened [CPPRO to ruin us].
d.*They began / threatened they / them to ruin us.
e. The president started to execute the demonstrators.
如(17)所示,begin和threaten與主語(yǔ)控制類動(dòng)詞try具有基本一致的句法表現(xiàn),但前者還可以以非生命性的名詞作為其主語(yǔ)(提升用法),而這是典型控制動(dòng)詞所不具備的。需要注意的是,在(17)e這種用法,與begin語(yǔ)義基本等同的start也是典型的控制類動(dòng)詞,比如He started to learn Greek。
最后需要指出的是,英語(yǔ)中有些動(dòng)詞的用法并不固定。比如,expect除了ECM、主語(yǔ)控制的用法外,還有賓語(yǔ)控制的用法。比如(18)a是出自英國(guó)海軍的一句口號(hào),其表達(dá)的實(shí)質(zhì)意義是(18)b,也就是說(shuō),其所表達(dá)的語(yǔ)義更像是賓語(yǔ)控制類動(dòng)詞的語(yǔ)義:
(18) a.England expects everyman to do his duty (Horatio Lord Nelson)
b.England imposes on everyman the obligation of doing his duty.
c.John seems to be a bit under the weather.
d.John seems [PRO to be a bit under the weather].
另外還需要注意的是,通常被視為提升動(dòng)詞的seem在(18)c所示的情況下也可能具有主語(yǔ)控制類的用法,其內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)的分析如(18)d所示;當(dāng)然(18)c通常是具有提升用法的,其語(yǔ)義如:John has been reported to be ill。與上述兼類的情形相反,lead在英語(yǔ)中只能作為賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞來(lái)使用,如(19)中的對(duì)比所示(Haegeman 1994:281):
(19) a.This analysis led them [PRO to conclude for themselves/*oneself that Poirot was Belgian].
b.*This analysis led [[PRO to conclude for oneself that Poirot was Belgian]].
c.They were led to conclude for themselves /*oneself that Poirot was Belgian.
d.Miss Marple was ordered to go on her own.
e.Miss Marple was instructed to go on her own.
f.Miss Marple was allowed to go on her own.
Bach定律認(rèn)為(Bach Generalization),賓語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)中的賓語(yǔ)內(nèi)論元是必選論元而且可以被動(dòng)化(Haegeman 1994)。據(jù)此,(19)c-f的合法句和(19)b的不合法都符合Bach定律的預(yù)測(cè)。最后還需要說(shuō)明的賓語(yǔ)控制類動(dòng)詞是(20)中所示的ask:
(20) a.We asked them to surrender.
b.We asked that they should surrender.
c.We asked to surrender.
d.We asked for Susan to buy me some potatoes. (Carnie 2011:252)
從(20)中所有的合法句可以看出,使用頻率很高的ask不僅具有賓語(yǔ)控制的用法(20)a、虛擬限定句補(bǔ)語(yǔ)用法(20)b和主語(yǔ)控制的用法(20)c,還可以后接for-to不定式句作其補(bǔ)語(yǔ),如(20)d所示。而更需要注意的是,ask還存在主語(yǔ)控制和任意控制這樣兩種語(yǔ)義的解讀差別,如(20)e中的反身代詞必須指稱主句主語(yǔ),而(20)f中的反身代詞只能做非強(qiáng)制性的解讀。就語(yǔ)義解讀而言,英語(yǔ)中的promise也是值得關(guān)注的主要?jiǎng)釉~之一。如下,(21)a和(21)b具有等值的語(yǔ)義,但如果(21)a具有(21)c所示的內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu),那么PRO因何不以距離更近的Bill為其先行語(yǔ)?
(21) a.John promised Bill to leave.
b.John promised Bill that he (John) would leave.
c.John promised Bill [PRO to leave].
d.John promised Mary to control himself.
e.*John promised Mary to control herself.
傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)法通常把promise視為三元?jiǎng)釉~,因此(24)a中的Bill屬于promise的一個(gè)內(nèi)論元,但是由于John和Bill都可以成分統(tǒng)制PRO,因此二者都有可能成為其先行語(yǔ),因此只能規(guī)定性地認(rèn)為promise隸屬主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞,只能以主語(yǔ)John為其先行語(yǔ)。因此,(24)d和(24)e之間對(duì)比性差異在于promise是主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞。事實(shí)上,還有一種更有說(shuō)服力的解釋如(22)所示的空介詞分析法:
(22) a.John promised (to) Mary to control himself.
b.John promised {to Mary} [PRO to control himself].
c.*John promised {to Mary} [PRO to control herself].
d.*Mary was promised by John to conrol himself.
從(22)所示的用例可以看出,{to Mary}作為附加語(yǔ)嫁接在主句動(dòng)詞promise之上,因而其中的Mary不能成分統(tǒng)制PRO,因此PRO只能以句首主語(yǔ)為其先行語(yǔ)。(22)c不合法是因?yàn)閔erself的語(yǔ)義先行語(yǔ)并不在其約束域內(nèi),從而違反了約束A原則。同時(shí),(22)d不合法,是因?yàn)閜romised作為主語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞的用法并不允準(zhǔn)被動(dòng)化操作。但promise不允準(zhǔn)被動(dòng)化的觀點(diǎn)應(yīng)該考慮到如下(23)中可以被動(dòng)化的例句:
(23) a.Jack promised her an I-phone 9.
b.She was promised an I-phone 9.
c.Jack promised her that she would get an I-phone 9.
d.She was promised by him that she would get an I-phone 9.
事實(shí)上,promise作為主句動(dòng)詞是否可以執(zhí)行被動(dòng)化還受到不定式句結(jié)構(gòu)特點(diǎn)的影響。比如,如下Bresnan(1980:404)的類似例句(24)顯示出promise可以被動(dòng)化的另外一種情況:
(24) a.Joanna was never promised [[PRO to be allowed to smoke]]
b.It was never promised to Joanna[[ to be allowed to smoke]].
c.[PRO to be allowed to smoke]] was never promised to Joanna.
d.Joanna was never promised that she would be allowed to smoke.
e.It was never promised to Joanna that she would be allowed to smoke.
f.That she would be allowed to smoke was never promised to Joanna.
g.There promised to be massive crowds of protestors.
從(24)g可以看出,promise其實(shí)還具有提升動(dòng)詞的用法。上述分析顯示,promise在有些用例中可被視為是二元?jiǎng)釉~,而在有些用例中則可被視為三元?jiǎng)釉~。其實(shí),真正的三元控制類動(dòng)詞基本上都是賓語(yǔ)控制動(dòng)詞,如(25)中的用例說(shuō)明:
(25) a. Jack convinced Bill to trust himself.
b. Jack convinced Rose to trust herself.
c.*Jack convinced Rose to trust himself.
d. Jack convinced Rose [PRO to trust herself / * himself].
(25)a中的Bill被賓語(yǔ)控制類動(dòng)詞convince選擇為內(nèi)論元,由于在句法結(jié)構(gòu)上,距離PRO最近的先行語(yǔ)為Rose,因此herself只能指稱Rose,而John和himself之間的聯(lián)系被潛在的可能先行語(yǔ)Rose所阻斷,因此,(25)c不合法,因?yàn)槠鋬?nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)如(25)d所示。
綜上所述,英語(yǔ)動(dòng)詞want、demand等都是以CP結(jié)構(gòu)為其補(bǔ)語(yǔ)的,而(1)a中以限定句為補(bǔ)語(yǔ)的句法結(jié)構(gòu)也是CP結(jié)構(gòu):We think [CP [C that] [TP she likes Jack]]。因此值得研究的是,這些補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句是否共享同一套生成機(jī)制,其中主語(yǔ)的格位指派是否達(dá)到了生成語(yǔ)法所要求的一致性原則? 以下我們從標(biāo)句詞及物性的視角來(lái)研究最簡(jiǎn)句法中的探針-目標(biāo)一致關(guān)系是如何運(yùn)用在上述結(jié)構(gòu)的生成中的。
3.1 PRO的分布及其特征組合
原則和參數(shù)理論認(rèn)為(Culicover 1997:85)兼具回指性和代詞性的空語(yǔ)類PRO因不受管轄而不能承載格位。據(jù)此可以預(yù)測(cè)的是PRO與顯性名詞呈現(xiàn)互補(bǔ)性分布,即有格位的位置上不能出現(xiàn)PRO,如(26)a-e所示:
(26) a.The protestors saw *PRO
b.The protestors think that*PRO will win.
c.The protestors believe*PRO to be strange.
d.*PRO is/are singing.
e.*The protestors spoke to PRO.
f.*There occurred three more accidents without PRO being any medical help available on the premises.(Haegeman 1994:279)。
仔細(xì)觀察,可以發(fā)現(xiàn),(26)f體現(xiàn)出PRO必須以有意愿的論元生命體作為其先行語(yǔ),而不能以虛指詞there作為其先行語(yǔ)。不過(guò),這并不意味著沒(méi)有格位的位置上就一定可以出現(xiàn)PRO,如下(27)中PRO出現(xiàn)的位置上都不具有格位,但句子依然不合法。
(27) a.* It was captured PRO.
b.*There was captured PRO.
c.*The soldier's destruction PRO was recorded.
d.*The soldiers believe very much PRO to have won.
事實(shí)上,PRO定理(PRO必須不受管轄)完全是經(jīng)由約束原則推演而得出的:在管轄域內(nèi),PRO的[+anaphoric]特征決定它必受約束,而其[+pronominal]特征又要求它必不受管轄。因此,解決方案就是PRO不具有管轄域。此外,(28)顯示出PRO的任指性語(yǔ)義特點(diǎn):
(28) a.To err is human,to forgive is divine.
b.[PRO to err] is human,[PRO to forgive] is divine.
c.To praise oneself is always unwise.
d.To praise him is always unwise.
e.[PRO to praise oneself / him] is always unwise.
f.Swimming away upset John.
g.PRO Swimming away upset John.
(28)b說(shuō)明,(28)a中具有PRO主語(yǔ),而其語(yǔ)義指稱具有任指性(arbitrary)?;诩s束原則A和B以及(28)c和(28)d中的語(yǔ)料,可以證明這兩個(gè)句子中必然具有PRO作主語(yǔ),否則無(wú)法解釋oneself在約束域內(nèi)是如何獲得語(yǔ)義指稱的,以及him為何必須要與篇章中其他的名詞短語(yǔ)同指。可見,(28)e中的分析是符合PRO定理和約束原則A、B的。那么PRO作為名詞短語(yǔ)是如何獲得格位指派的呢?
3.2 三類名詞短語(yǔ)的句法分布共性
Davies & Dubinsky(2004)認(rèn)為,want的補(bǔ)語(yǔ)句具有for的空形式,而與此相關(guān)聯(lián)的是類似于John wanted her to please us中的her的賓格自然也就是標(biāo)句詞for所指派的,而非由可以跨越語(yǔ)障的want指派的。Rizzi(1997:304)曾指出,PRO作主語(yǔ)時(shí)的空格應(yīng)該是由C來(lái)指派的,而限定性標(biāo)句詞理應(yīng)為主格指派者的觀點(diǎn)已經(jīng)被普遍接受(Chomsky 1995:35)。問(wèn)題是賓格指派與主格、空格的指派機(jī)制是否具有一致性呢?以下(29)是對(duì)相關(guān)的三種情形的分析:
(29) a.John tried / consented [CP[C] [TPPRO [Tto] please us]
b.John arranged / desired[CP[C][TPPRO [Tto] please us]
c.John preferred / arranged[CP[Cfor][TPher [Tto] please us]]
d.John wanted / preferred[CP[Cfor][TPher [Tto] please us]]
e.John thought / said[CP[Cthat][TPshe [Twould] please us]]
f.John thought / said[CP[Cthat][TPshe [Twould[ please us]]
可以看出,(29)已經(jīng)呈現(xiàn)出格位指派的一致性模式:及物性不同的三類標(biāo)句詞成分決定著相關(guān)名詞短語(yǔ)的格位拼讀形式:空標(biāo)句詞[C ]具有空一致特征(null agreement features),傳遞給[T to]后由其執(zhí)行空格指派;及物性標(biāo)句詞[C for/ for]具有賓格一致特征,傳遞給[T to 后由其執(zhí)行賓格指派;而不及物性標(biāo)句詞[C that/ that]具有主格一致特征,傳遞給[T would]之后,由其指派主格。Collins(2005:104)認(rèn)為,PRO主語(yǔ)的空格是由C指派的機(jī)制理應(yīng)和主格、賓格的指派機(jī)制具有一致性,而(29)所呈現(xiàn)的一致性完全可以簡(jiǎn)化為(30):
(30) a.[CP[CΦ ] [TPPRO [Tto ] [VP]]] MODALITY
b.[CP[Cfor / for] [TPACC [Tto ] [VP]]] TRANSITIVITY
c.[CP[Cthat / that] [TPSUB [TAf] [VP]]] TENSE
Chomsky(2008)在語(yǔ)段論中進(jìn)一步提出,任何類型的標(biāo)句詞都屬于語(yǔ)段中心語(yǔ),承載著所有的不可解讀特征,但標(biāo)句詞并非是真正執(zhí)行格位指派的探針;在句法結(jié)構(gòu)的推導(dǎo)機(jī)制開始運(yùn)作之前,標(biāo)句詞C必須把一致性特征和EPP特征移交給緊接其下的功能語(yǔ)類T,并由T來(lái)執(zhí)行主格指派。而上述(30)中的主格、賓格和空格的指派機(jī)制符合語(yǔ)段論對(duì)特征傳遞的要求,因而是最簡(jiǎn)句法中較為優(yōu)化的格位指派機(jī)制。另外,前文對(duì)主語(yǔ)控制、賓語(yǔ)控制以及ECM等動(dòng)詞諸多用法的辨析表明,依據(jù)其是否具有顯性主語(yǔ)、是否顯性標(biāo)句詞并不能完全識(shí)別某種語(yǔ)言中的限定性結(jié)構(gòu)和非限定性結(jié)構(gòu),因?yàn)楹拖薅ň渲屑瓤梢杂袑?shí)主語(yǔ)也可以有空主語(yǔ)一樣,非限定性也同樣既可以有實(shí)主語(yǔ),也可以有空主語(yǔ);如果限定句的標(biāo)句詞可以為實(shí)或?yàn)樘撘粯樱窍薅ň涞臉?biāo)句詞也可以或?yàn)閷?shí)或?yàn)樘?。至關(guān)重要的是,在非限定句的辨識(shí)中,時(shí)間信息是否呈現(xiàn)并不能作為唯一的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),因?yàn)橥ǔUJ(rèn)可的非限定句是允準(zhǔn)時(shí)態(tài)變化的,如(31)所示:
(31) a.We believe him to be lying. (含有現(xiàn)在時(shí)態(tài)特征的非限定句)
b.We believe him to have left. (含有過(guò)去時(shí)態(tài)的非限定句)
c.We are hoping for him to take her out. (含有將來(lái)時(shí)態(tài)的非限定句)
d.She seems to be leaving.
e.She seemed to have done her bit.
f.She seems to leave for home soon.
英語(yǔ)控制理論研究的焦點(diǎn)都是與PRO有關(guān)的一些問(wèn)題:控制語(yǔ)如何選擇、確定和轉(zhuǎn)換;被動(dòng)化、焦點(diǎn)化能否執(zhí)行;補(bǔ)語(yǔ)結(jié)構(gòu)中的側(cè)向移位;反身代詞的隱性控制;分列式控制結(jié)構(gòu)中語(yǔ)義解讀如何實(shí)現(xiàn);部分控制中的成分統(tǒng)制能否實(shí)現(xiàn)等(Boeckx et al.2010)。Hornstein(1999)一直主張廢棄PRO而采用移位來(lái)統(tǒng)一分析提升和控制,但Landau(2013)則基于跨語(yǔ)言的語(yǔ)料證據(jù)支持PRO存在的假設(shè)。最簡(jiǎn)句法基于后一種觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為,限定句是不允準(zhǔn)PRO為其主語(yǔ)的,PRO是與非限定性相關(guān)的句法主語(yǔ)(Radford 2004),而本文所擇選的諸多用例顯示,非限定性結(jié)構(gòu)不僅包括各種控制結(jié)構(gòu),而且還包括其他并非以PRO為主語(yǔ)或者根本就不允準(zhǔn)主語(yǔ)的結(jié)構(gòu)。本文僅僅嘗試為限定句、for-to不定式以及主語(yǔ)控制結(jié)構(gòu)中的格位賦值機(jī)制提供統(tǒng)一分析,而未來(lái)的研究更應(yīng)該考慮如何對(duì)其他非限定結(jié)構(gòu)作統(tǒng)一處理。
Boeckx,C,N.Hornstein & J.Nunes.2010.ControlasMovement[M].New York:Cambridge University Press.
Bresman,J.1980.TheoryofComplementizationinEnglish[M].New York:Garlund.
Carnie, A.2011.ModernSyntax[M].London:Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky,N.1995.TheMinimalistProgram[M].Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press.
Chomsky,N.2007.Approaching UG from below[A].S.Uli & H.M.Gartner(eds.).Interfaces+Recursion=Language?[C].New York:Mouton de Gruyter.
Chomsky,N.2008.On phases[A].M.Kenstowicz(ed.).KenHale:ALifeinLanguage[C].Cambridge:MIT Press.
Chomsky,N.2013.The problems of projection[J].Lingua(130):33-49.
Chomsky,N.2014.Minimal recusion:Exploring the Prospects[A].T.Roeper & Speas,M(eds.).Recursion:ComplexityinCognition[C].Switzerland:Springer International Publishing,1-14.
Collins,C.2005.A smuggling approach to the passive in English[J].Syntax(8):81-120.
Culicover,P.1997.PrinciplesandParameters[M].London:Oxford University Press
Culicover,P.2009.NaturalLanguageSyntax[M].London:Oxford University Press.
Davies,W.& Dubinsky.2004.TheGrammarofRaisingandControl:ACourseinSyntacticArgumentation[M].New York:Blackwell. Haegeman,L.1994.IntroductiontoGovernmentandBindingTheory[M].London:Oxford University Press
Horstein,N.1999.Movement and Control[J].LingucsticInquiry(30):69-96.
Landau,I .2013.ControlinGenerativeGrammar:AResearchCompainon[M].New York:Cambridge University Press.
Poole,G.2011.SyntacticTheory[M].Palgrave Macmillan.Rizzi,L.1997.The fine structure of the left penphery[A].L.Haegman(ed.).ElementsofGrammar[C].Boston:MA:kluwer,281-337.
Radford,A.2009.AnalyzingEnglishSentenceStructures[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
徐烈炯,1984,管轄與約束理論[J],《國(guó)外語(yǔ)言學(xué)》(2):1-15。
(馬志剛:廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)語(yǔ)言學(xué)及應(yīng)用語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究中心副研究員)
通訊地址:510420廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)語(yǔ)言學(xué)及應(yīng)用語(yǔ)言學(xué)研究中心
*本文系國(guó)家社科基金一般項(xiàng)目“漢語(yǔ)特色句式的優(yōu)化生成及其中介語(yǔ)加工機(jī)制研究”的階段性成果,項(xiàng)目編號(hào)15BYY090。
H03
A
2095-9645(2015)03-0028-07
2015-05-03