Cognitive Research, The Auxiliary Verb "can" And "will"

In this thesis, we discuss on the difference between"neng"and"hui"in modern Chinese category of possibility. We first investigate semantical aspects of"neng"and"hui", and discuss on their difference in semantics and syntax.In chapter 1, we introduce purpose, main content, implication of the thesis, theory used in our analysis, and source of examples. Language is changing, and reflect on the change of its speaker. While people express their idea and feelings using language in their daily lives, they attempt to refine their expression. Such subjective effort leads to change of meaning of word, that is, concrete and practical meaning changes into abstract one."Neng"and"hui"likewise go through such subjectification, that is, speaker came to express subjective idea or feeling using"neng"and"hui". The change in word is mostly realized by metaphor, metonymy, pragmatic inference in grammaticalization.In chapter 2, we explain how speaker expresses different meaning domain, that is, content domain, epistemic domain, affect domain, speech act domain using"neng"and"nui". We also list difference of"neng"and"hui"in each subdomain of meaning domain, and discuss on link between semantics and syntax. In particular we show that each domain functions different way when speaker express subjective idea or feelings using"neng'and"hui".In chapter 3, we compare"neng"and"hui"in epistemic domain."Neng"and"hui"have different meaning when speaker distinguish their use in which they take different syntactical forms. We introduce the concept of strength of subjective assurance in relation to semantics and syntax of"neng"and"hui". When speaker has strong assurance for the possibility of a certain event, he uses"neng". When he has weak assurance, he uses"hui". Such difference leads to semantical and syntactical difference.In chapter 4, we discuss on the difference between"neng VC"and"V de C"from the view point of speaker's subjective assurance. We show that"neng VC"and"V de C"take different presupposition, that is"neng VC"takes virtual one and"V de C"takes real one. In other words,"neng VC"shows inference of speaker from his personal idea and longtime experience, and"V de C"just states fact itself. We also show that when"V de C"express possibility for the event for certain occasion, it also reflects on speaker's subjective assurance. When it is compared to"neng VC", the speaker shows weaker assurance for the result of a certain action, thus it can be categorized to one with small strength of subjective assurance. Semantically,"neng VC"expresses speaker's assurance, and"V de C"expresses speaker's inference.In chapter 5, we summarize what we discussed in previous chapters and give conclusion.