any名词及任何名词的句法及语义研究word格式论文.docxVIP

优秀毕业论文 精品参考文献资料 Abstract This study primarily concerns with the syntax and semantics of “any+N” in English and “renhe+N” in Chinese including their distributional and semantic properties and the similarities and differences between the two. Both any and renhe have two types of behaviors, that is, Negative Polarity and Free Choice. The two uses of any and renhe show different behaviors in terms of quantificational force and distribution. We find that the two items exhibit related but still different distributional properties by comparing them. Various hypotheses from the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic perspectives concerning the distribution and properties of any have been raised. NPIs any and renhe are bound by existential quantifier and licensed in negative, downward entailing, and nonveridical environments. We adopt Chomsky’s (1981) Binding Theory to analyze the relationship between any and renhe and their licensors and licensing operators. Any should be c-commanded by a polarity operator Op of the same clause. The distribution of renhe is subject to more constraints than that of any. Renhe in Chinese should be within the scope of a polarity operator Op at LF. There is a m-command relation, rather than c-command, between renhe and its licensing operator Op. So renhe is stronger than any in Zwarts’ (1993) sense. FCI any may occur in modal statements and other contexts. It is a universal quantifier and has the universal reading. FCI renhe，when occurring in generic contexts, is licensed by dou-quantification. Based on their complex semantic characteristics, any and renhe are subject to some distributional constraints. It is their unique semantic properties that bring the two items Polarity Sensitivity. It is accepted that Polarity Sensitivity Items must be within the scope of their licensers in order to be licensed. It’s noticed that PSIs any and renhe are closely related with and sensitive to the contextual features where they may appear and the licensing o