A Study On The Restrictive Adverb In Mandarin Chinese

Adverb-studying becomes a hotspot these days. However, it is also a nodus which had puzzled the linguists up to the present. More we work over it, more problems come forth. Whereas, we think that it might be feasible to focus on a subcategory of it. Herein, we choose the restrictive adverbs in mandarin Chinese to make a thoroughly investigation on it.This dissertation gives a systematic description of the restrictive adverbs in mandarin Chinese in both macroscopic and microcosmic lays. Moreover, it tries to make an explanation to some particular syntactic and discourse behaviors of this category of adverb.This dissertation is divided into six chapters, and about 120 thousand letters.Chapter One is introduction and briefly introduces the object, scope, principles, methods, the corpus and the symbols of this research paper. In this chapter we clarified following ideas: 1) is to define the concept of the restrictive adverbs in mandarin Chinese, viz. a subcategory of adverb whose main function is to limit the quantity and range of a subject, and the shared semantic character of this subcategory is [+upper--limiting]; 2) is to bring forward an idea on category classifying ,namely semantic criterion ,with an introduction to some representative viewpoints; and3) it shows the relationship between our research and the previous research on the basis of a summarization of the previous research. Chapter Two is an investigation of the restrictive adverbs based on an analysis of their semantic characters. In this chapter, we divided the restrictive adverbs (XF) into two subcategories: one is quantity restricting adverb (LF), and another is range restricting adverb (WF).Then we investigated the differences between these two subcategories at different ways. These ways are the semantic orientation, negation, "+shi(是)" and "+you(有)". This chapter shows that there're some systemic differences between the LF and WF. The conclusions are: 1) on semantic orientation, the WF was apt to refer backwards, singly, really, and cannot refer to quantity, when as the LF is on opposite side ; 2) about negation, the WF can cooperate with bu (不)and mei(没) freely, but the LF cannot; 3) when "+shi(是)" and "+you(有)" the WF is apt to "+shi(是)" and LF do not plus either one.Chapter Three is the continuance of the chapter two. Firstly, it goes deep into the "LF" and the "WF" to make a detailed description to their members. Moreover, it surveys the structure of "the restrictive adverb +NP" and the reduplication of the monosyllabic restrictive adverb. About the phenomena of the structure of "the restrictive adverb +NP" we found there was a mutually choice between the adverb and the NP. To the reduplication of the monosyllabic restrictive adverb we considered it must be grammatical, and there're some pragmatic functions in the reduplication form of the monosyllabic restrictive adverb.Chapter Four focus on the theme of the co-operation and sequential use of the restrictive adverb. Firstly, based on the investigation to the corpus, we got two rules about the word-order in the sequential use of the restrictive adverb, they are: I) disyllable preceding; II )LF preceding. Secondly, we opened out the motivation to these two rules from Prosody and Semantic orientation. Finally, we tried to find the semantic cause of the word-order in the sequential use of the restrictive adverbs by taking "cai(才)+zhi(只)" as an example. The conclusions of this chapter are that the motivation which controls the rule I) is the prosodic syntax principle of Chinese, and the one which controls the rule II) is Forbidding a Barrier inserting between semantic orientation source and its semantic orientation target in Chinese.Chapter Five is a discussion about the connective function. The conclusions are: the restrictive adverbs have connective functions in both syntax and discourse, such as marking topic, explanation, transition, deduction, pre-climax etc.. All these connective functions of the restrictive adverb are determined by the semantic characters and the distributing of themselves. Meanwhile, we also discussed the motivation of the formation of "budan"and suchlike conjunctives from the perpective of Markedness theory and Grammarticalixation theory.The basic conclusion are: There're two marked morphemes in everymember of this kind of conjunctives, and this two marked items form an unmarked pair.Furthermore, a set of synonymy conjunctives were formed with the function of the mechanism of reanalysis and analogy. Meanwhile, the paper also give some translanguage proovs to this "limitive+negtive" word-forming model.Chapter Six summarizes the whole thesis and points out its shortcomings.We also made appendixes on the end of chapters and bibliographies on the end pages of this dissertation.