英语学术论实用写作 第十一章 如何在英语论文中使用汉语语料.pptVIP

　　　 （2）在下面的例子中，“吃父母”、“吃工资”等都有中英文对照 　　The Chinese language, as Nida and Taber (1982) have observed, is a paratactic language, in contrast to hypotactic languages such as English. In the specific case of chi, the paratactic properties of Chinese are evidenced by the fact that this verb collocates with a larger variety of non-Patient objects than its English counterpart eat. The intended meaning of the object expression is often metaphoric or metonymic. For example, in chi fumu ‘to eat parents’ fumu has the semantic role Source, which is metonymically interpreted as ‘to eat food provided by parents’ (for the conception of metonymy assumed here, see e.g. Panther and Thornburg, 2007). Furthermore, unlike English, chi licenses objects with the thematic role Means, which is instantiated by e.g. Chinese nouns meaning ‘salary’, ‘donations’, ‘capital’, ‘tax’, ‘reward’, ‘tip’, ‘dowry’, ‘award’, ‘property’, ‘car fare’, ‘past achievements’, ‘craftsmanship’, and many others. For example, chi gongzi ‘to eat wages’ literally means ‘to eat food bought with one salary’ or figuratively ‘to live on one salary’. The use of objects with the thematic role Means is thus typical of Chinese and its significance has hitherto been neglected in research on thematic hierarchies. 　 （3）下面例子中的“吃杯子”，有三种版本，既有拼音，又有英文的字面对应和意译方法 　　The availability of NPs varies for each thematic role. Patients occur more frequently than Locatives and Instruments, and, in general, Patients are intuitively more natural than non-Patients in the object position. For test sentences with Locatives and Instruments as direct objects, contextual elements were added that increase the acceptability of sentences. For instance, sentence 1), which contains a non-Patient object, is unnatural in isolation and may even be misleading because it can be understood as meaning that people who contract allotriophagy consume cups as food. But with additional contextual elements, 1) becomes perfectly acceptable, as illustrated in 2).