A Study On "bi (比)" Comparative Sentence In Modern Chinese

Comparative sentence has a very important role in linguistic typology，this kind ofsentences is also one of the most important items in grammatical investigation.Comparative sentence in modern Chinese has high research value as special grammaticalphenomena in typology and language universals. In order to explore the commonness ofthe various comparative sentences in the world, the research of the comparative sentencein modern Chinese should have the perspective of linguistic typology. The paper isdivided into five chapters.The first chapter is an introduction. In this chapter we first explained the content onthe comparative sentence in A Handbook for Grammatical Investigation and Research.Secondly, we found that the comparative sentence has a very important role in linguistictypology from the Greenberg and Dryer’ research. Finally, we explained the object ofstudy，research scope, content, research ideas, corpus sources and symbols.The second chapter is a literature review. In this chapter we reviewed as many detailsas the existing relevant outcomes, and combed the academic context of the comparativesentence, including the overview about the definition of the comparative sentence, thebasic elements，the research of cognitive linguistics and typologies.The third chapter discussed the basic elements of “bi（比）”comparative sentence inmodern Chinese. The main conclusions of this chapter are the following：(1) the omissionof the subject constituents depends on two, the first point is whether the semanticspreading activation relationship between the adjective and the qualified word of subject.If you compare the qualified word of subject in a highly active state, then the qualifiedword of subject can be omitted; If the concept of the qualified word of subject relativelyinactive (or active degree inferior to other concepts), then the qualified word of subject cannot be omitted, otherwise it would cause ambiguity. The second point is the qualifiedword of subject is whether relatively prototype member of the adjective. If the qualifiedword of subject is the prototype member of the adjective, then the qualified word ofsubject can be omitted; If the qualified word of subject is non-prototype member (poorermembers) of the adjective, then the qualified word of subject cannot be omitted.(2)Semantic spreading activation theory of functional models and prototypes areintrinsically linked, the easier the more the prototype member activated, then omit thisingredient does not affect people understand the meaning of the sentence; morenon-members of the prototype is not easy to activate more such components cannot beomitted.(3) The omission of the standard constituents is constrained by the quantity; it isthe mutual balance between adequate standards and inadequate standards.(4)Theadjectives are divided into adjective, verbal and noun of three categories,"X+bi（比）+NP+hai（还）+NP" format is mainly characterized that the noun has a comparativedimension richness.(5) From the perspective of linguistic typology, the structure ofmodern Chinese adjective compared with other world languages with complexcharacteristics, because the flexibility of comparative points in modern Chinesedetermines the complexity of the adjective structure.The fourth chapter we discussed“bi（比）”comparative sentence in modern Chinesefrom the perspective of linguistic typology. Chinese is regard as the language which has astrong personality, and it reflects many of the characteristics and laws are inconsistentwith the world’s languages. We use the methods of linguistic typology fromcross-language, cross-dialect comparative perspective to compare the word order of “bi（比）”comparative sentence, then explain the individuality and commonality. The wordorder of comparative sentence in modern Chinese actually contains commoncharacteristics. Firstly, comparative sentence in modern Chinese and word order inChinese prepositional phrase there is a strong correlation. The internal word order of "marker+standard" is in line with the language universals，so the differences are mainlyreflected on the relative position between the prepositional phrase and the adjective. Theadjective is located after " marker+standard" in SVO languages except for Chinese, butthe adjective is located before " marker+standard" in Chinese. This is consistent with the location of Chinese prepositional phrase. Fundamentally speaking, the word order ofcomparative sentence is in line with Chinese internal consistency and harmony, isactually a "common" expression. Secondly, the word order of comparative sentence andDik’s order principle for relators exist consistency. The prepositional phrase contacts withthe two relators, and the word order of comparative sentence in modern Chinese is in linewith Dik’s order principle for relators.The fifth chapter is the conclusion.