[請益] Syntax thematic role
這題目出自 Bas Aarts---English Syntax and Argumentation
Frawley(1992: 201ff.) contrasts the thematic role of Agent with that of
"Author": 'whereas the agent is the direct doer, the author is simply the
enabler, or the indirect cause' (1992: 205). He clamis that distinguishing
these roles allows us to account for the differences between (i) and (ii)
below.
(i) Bill floated down the river.
(ii) The canoe floated down the river.
From the point of view of thematic roles, which differences can you detect
between the Subject expressions of thes sentences? Do you feel that adding
a new theta-role of Author to the list in the textin is justified?
然後這裡的Author是指Bill, the canoe, the river?
還是說其實Author並不合理 Bill和canoe皆是agent?
這兩個主詞除了有無生命和主被動之外還有其他差別嗎?
我問過一些同學得到的是有人覺得合理也有人覺得不合理 或者這還要看context?
所以想請教對syntax擅長或有興趣的人
方便的話請說說你的看法和論點
非常謝謝
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 120.107.174.106
※ 編輯: wyuan 來自: 120.107.174.106 (03/28 14:59)
※ 編輯: wyuan 來自: 120.107.174.106 (03/28 15:00)
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 2 篇)：
Linguistics 近期熱門文章
PTT職涯區 即時熱門文章
