Font Size: a A A

A Contrast On The Strategies Of The Segmentation On Motion Sememe Between Russion And Chinese And A Futhermove Observation On The Essence Of The Segmentation On Sememe

Posted on:2006-03-09Degree:MasterType:Thesis
Country:ChinaCandidate:F Q TongFull Text:PDF
GTID:2155360155954421Subject:Linguistics and Applied Linguistics
Abstract/Summary:PDF Full Text Request
Semantic segmentation, a new concept put forward in semantic researchrecently, refers to segmentation and categorization of language to people'ssuccessive and boundless empirical structure. At present, the studies onsemantic segmentation mainly focus on differences in culture, such as cultureconcerning, to the influence and decisive role of different languages.Before "semantic segmentation"was put forward, studies on the theoryof semantic field are mainly the succession and the development of Sassaure'stheory of Relative & Value on semantic field theory, i.e. the widely discussionof Trier—Weisgerber's theory. Except the criticisms on theories, quite aportion of articles combines sememes to analyze and gives a description ofspecific semantic field in Chinese and draws a conclusion. It is because ofpeople's fully description and concerns to the related and systematic point ofview on semantic field, which made necessary and fully preparation forfurther concerning about the segmentation and categorization of differentlanguages to boundless empirical fields, that the concept of semanticsegmentation was put forward.Semantic segmentation refers to segmentation and categorization oflanguage to people's successive and boundless empirical structure. Accordingto Culture Linguistics, especially the current situation of studies on thelanguage of national conditions, the study for verb is relatively weak,therefore, we choose verb as the materials to study, which provides somereference for the studies on verb. Another reason why we choose verb (mainlymotion verb) as the study object is related to the verb's nuclear function andits governed role. The contrastive analysis between the motion verb in Russianand the motion sememe in Chinese has advantage of disclosing the verbalfeature of these two languages. Studies on differences and similarities ofsegmentation on motion sememe in these two languages has advantage ofknowing the function of motion verb in Russian and related verb in Chinese intheir syntactic systems respectively. Owing to the difference on the strategiesof the segmentation on motion sememe between Chinese and Russian, it hasadvantage of disclosing and acknowledging to the syntactic system in bothChinese and Russian.We have a survey of statistical analysis on 672 Russian motion verbsincluding V pattern and prefix patter, 853 sememes. Through the specificanalysis, we can get the basic sememe, then describe and generalize itssemantic feature, thus acquire the basic parameters of motion sememe onsemantic segmentation in Chinese and Russian. Compared to these parametersof the word difference in these two languages, we investigate the amount ofthe specific members and its semantic share and we can find out thedifferences and similarities of segmental strategy in Chinese and Russian.Through comparative analysis, we found out that there is a common semanticparameter in Chinese when expressing motion sememe. Generally speaking,both Chinese and Russian take the parameters such as "A, b, B, d1, D1, d2,D2, …. e, E, F"into consideration when expressing motion sememe, the onlydifference is that they choose different number of semantic parameter as theevidence of verbalization. Our investigation shows that the degree ofverbalization in Russian is higher than that in Chinese. The differences onverbalization in Chinese and Russian directly influence many different aspectsto the two languages on its expressing level. Thus the parameters related tomotion in Chinese, such as tool, place, basically were not expressed throughverb directly when entering the expressing level, but through adverbial,complement for the realization, while in Russian, they had congealed into thewords. At the same time, we need to point out that there are two kinds ofreflections of the above parameters we mentioned on syntax: one is that someRussian verbs can be without complement, when the verbalized parameterscan express the meaning; another is that the verbalized parameters does notexpress the meaning independently, but needs a concrete complement to showthe related features together and the verbs with different prefix will formselection limit with co-occurrences.We have to point out that "motion verbs"in Russian form a semanticpolymerization—semantic field, where each member of the field carries on apart of sememes. In the language system of Russian, motion verb carries itsdivisions respectively and gets their values. However, when we comparedthem, what we should lay more emphasis on is that Chinese and Russian takedifferent segmental strategies, which results from the different ways ofverbalization and by which it caused. The author believes that this differencedoes directly relate to the different segmental strategies. The related fields onlanguage and culture give us various explanations and discussions, but theymainly focus on culture concerning to the decisive and influential aspects ofsemantic segmentation, which mainly point out the semantic segmentation'sinfluence and various languages'semantic field caused by cultural concerning,and explain the influential functions brought about by culture factors.The motion verbs in Russian and the motion sememe in Chinese showtheir difference on the degree of division of semantic segmentation, but theyhave common features. That is both Chinese and Russian has a commonparameter when they have segmentation to motion sememe, but they havedifferent choice when they are verbalized, which influence the expressionlevel. Now we have presented these parameters, such as"A,b,B,d(d1,d2……),D(D1,D2……),E,F", but the way of verbalization in Russianis x+D+y{x=[A,b,B](coocurrence),y=[d(d1,d2……),D(D1,D2……),E,F](coocurrence)},while it is D in Chinese.Through the contrastive analysis of the expression on motion verbs inRussian and motion sememes in Chinese, we found out that obviousdifferences exist between the ways of their verbalizations: Russian mainlytake comprehensive expression, while Chinese take analyzing expression.Based on the difference of verbalization, it shows differences on theexpression level: the motion verbs form selection limit to co-occurrence,...
Keywords/Search Tags:Segmentation
PDF Full Text Request
Related items