兼语式-汉斯出版社.PDF

Modern Linguistics 现代语言学, 2018, 6(4), 565-572 Published Online October 2018 in Hans. /journal/ml /10.12677/ml.2018.64066 Chinese “Pivotal Structure” Is Not Pivotal at All: A Further Discussion —Mistaken “Pivotal Structure” Due to Its Mistaken Definition, Actually a Compound Object Instead * * Yingjie Zhang , Huifen Tong Pudong, Shanghai nd st th Received: Aug. 22 , 2018; accepted: Aug. 31 , 2018; published: Sep. 7 , 2018 Abstract The purpose of this article is to approach the crux of the problem arising from the “pivotal struc- ture”, and upon the basis of the original text “Chinese ‘Pivotal Structure’ Is Not Pivotal At All” [1] to exposit that the proposition that “the definition of a pivotal structure is a verb-object structure hitched by a subject-predicate structure” [2] is unsubstantiated for no existing grammatical evi- dence of “a subject-predicate structure” in the “pivotal structure”. Therefore, “a subject-predicate structure” in the “pivotal structure” is clearly pure speculation, and then a false concept has been invented, which is a shame for the field of Chinese linguistics. Undoubtedly, the one being defined above is actually a compound object instead. After that this article gives a definition to a compound object, and also points out clearly that a fundamental difference between the subject-predicate rela- tion in the grammatical category and the one in the logical category lies in whether the “subject” and “predicate” are in the same syntactic level or not. And so, it shows objectively and adequately that Chinese structure level analysis method is very important and necessary. Based on the above results, this article can make it definite fur