英語 複會名詞의 分析 . 45-2

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this study is to analyze the syntactic and semantic properties of complex nominals in English, and to propose appropriate underlying structures and transformational derivations within generative semantic theory.
A complex nominal is defined as a syntactic construction composed in its simplest form of a head noun preceded by a modifier which is either another noun or a nominal adjective and dominated by a node label of noun on the surface.
Complex nominals must be analyzed as nouns: affixes which are attachable to simple nouns, but not to full noun phrases, are attachable to these elements; predicating adjectives may not be interspersed between the adjective and noun of a complex nominal; both nouns and complex nominals which are grammatically singular, count, and common must be preceded by a determiner of some sort; anaphoric processes do not work inside complex nominals, which suggests that they be analysed as single words: and only single unmodified words can occur as initial elements in these constructions, never entire phrases.
These follow from an analysis in which complex nominals themselves belong to a lexical category, not a phrasal category.
The fact that nonpredicating adjectives appear to function just like nouns strongly suggests the hypothesis that such adjectives are derived from underlying nouns, and predicts that these adjectives manifest semantic and syntactic characteristics of nouns, despite their surface morphological difference: neither nouns nor nonpredicating adjectives may be immediately preceded by very, quite or other degree ad verbials; both nouns and nonpredicating adjectives conjoin only with other nouns or nonpredicating adjectives: both nouns and nonpredicating adjectives may appear after quantifiers, but not true adjectives: both nouns and nonpredicating adjectives may be categorized by semantic features such as [±def finite], [±concrete], [± animate], [±human], [±masculine), and [±comnon]; both nouns and nonpredicating adjectives may be analysed as entering into case relations such as agentive, objective, locative, dative, and instrumental: neither nouns nor nonpredicating adjectives are subject to the process of nominalization which normally turns predicating elements(verbs and adjectives) into derived lexical nouns.
An examination of the communicative function served by complex nominals covers the following: compacting function, naming function, demonstrative function, and sub-categorizing function. When complex nominals can be understood as naming and demonstrative devices, most comlex nominals begin their life with semantic transparency. But when they can be understood as sub-categorizing devices, they may be generated with tremendous productivity, and sooner or later lose their initial transparency as they acquire elements of specialized meaning: these forms then enter the lexicon and so must be learned as idiosyncratic units by the next generation.
Complex noninals are derived by just two syntactic processes: predicate deletion and predicate nominalization. Complex nominals not derived by nominalization processes have their origins in semanic structures from which only nine predicates may be subsequently deleted: CAUSE, HAVE, MAKE, USE, BE, IN, FOR, FROM, and ABOUT. These predicates may be deleted in the process of transforming relative clause construction into the typically ambiguous surface configuration of the complex nominal. The derivations are divided into three types accord ing to the morphological shape of the compound adjective formed in an intermediate step: these three types are a passive participle form, an active participle form, and a preposition form. The transformational processes that are essential to the formation of these complex nominals are lexical insertion, case preposition spelling, passive, compound adjective formation, copula insertion relative pronoun formation, WH-fronting, WH-be deletion, predicate preposing, predicate deletion, and morphological adjectivalization, Complex nominal by predicate deletion is potentially ambiguous. In actual usage, however, this relatively large ambiguity is reduced to very manageable proportions by judicious exploitation of semantic clues, lexicalization, and pragmatic or extralinguistic(encyclopaedic) knowledge.
For complex nominals derived by predicate nominalization, the head noun is a nominalized verb, and the prenominal modifier is derived from either the underlying subject or the underlying, irect object of this verb. Nominalized verbs are divided into four fundamental types: ACT, PRODUCT, AGENT, and PATIENT nominalizations. Complex nominals in which such nominalizations form head nouns are classified into three major groups: Subjecti.e, Objective, and Multimodiffier complex nominals. The transformations listed into their proposed order of application are as follows: lexical insertion of verb, case preposition spelling, nominalization lexical insertion of nominalization, unspecified noun phrase deletion, subject preposing, object adjunction, object adjunction, object preposing, subjective genitive formation, subject adjunction, morphological adjectivalization, and by- of adjustment. Complex nominals derived by predicate nominalization can operate recursively, producing complex nominals from complex nominals by repeated, cyclic application. In conclusion, complex nominals are derived by these two syntactic processes: predicate deletion and predicate nominalization. The potential ambiguity caused by predicate deletion is reduced in discourse by both semantic and pragmatic considerations. Because of the recursive nature of complex nominal formation, a complex nominal may be short or long.
To sum up, this study has revealed that non-lexicalized complex nominals in English have the syntactic and semantic regularities.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• 1. 序論 = 3
• 1.1 硏究의 目的과 範圍 = 3
• 1.2 複合名詞의 規定 = 5
• 2. 複合名詞의 特性 = 9
• 2.1 複合名詞의 統辭的 特性 = 9
• 2.2 複合名詞의 機能的 特性 = 16
• 3. 複合名詞의 生成 = 20
• 3.1 述語削除 = 20
• 3.2 述語名詞化 = 46
• 4. 結論 = 79
• 參考文獻 = 82
• (Abstract) = 92