【作者】 曾建彬；

【导师】 褚孝泉；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 英语语言文学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 下义关系是一种存在于概括词和具体词之间的词义纵聚合关系。本论文是从认知和语义的视角对下义关系进行系统的研究。与下义关系相关的研究涉及哲学、认知科学和语言学。其在哲学领域的相关研究可以追溯到亚里士多德关于man和animal之间的种属包含关系。这种包含关系在冯堡特对于人类语言结构和精神发展的哲学研究中被认为是人类与生俱来的，即人类为了达到思维的条理严密，天生具有一种将不同概念分类成为种范畴和属范畴的本能。对下义关系的哲学研究关注词汇意义的所指与客观被指称物之间的相互关系，而非词汇意义之间的相互关系。相关的认知科学研究则关注人类对客观世界的分类模式和认知结构，其中包括认知心理学中的范畴理论和原型结构(Rosch1973，1976，1978)，人类语言学中的民俗生物分类(Berlin 1973，1976，1978)，以及信息科学中的WordNet等。而对下义关系的语言学研究则是传统的结构主义词汇语义学对于包括同义关系、反义关系、下义关系、以及部分／整体关系等词汇意义关系研究的一项重要内容。对下义关系的语言学研究一直关注这种词汇意义关系在语言词汇结构中的作用，如索绪尔(1915)和特里尔(1932，1934)。这一与下义关系相关的语言学研究传统在当代对词汇语义学的系统研究有：《结构语义学》(Lyons 1968)，《语义学》(Lyons 1977)，《语义场和词汇结构》(Lehrer1974)，《词汇语义学》(Cruse 1986)，《语言的范畴化：语言理论中的类典型》(Taylor 1996)，《心理词汇中的动词结构》(Pavlicic 2004)等。莱昂斯(1968：453，1977：291)是最早对下义关系命名和定义的语言学家。这种介于上义词和下义词及其共下义词之间的词汇意义纵聚合关系很快为语言学界所接受，并在语言分析中发挥了重要作用。然而，对下义关系的研究仍然存在一些有待于解决的问题。首先，在下义关系的包含方向上存在分歧，即上义词包含下义词，还是下义词包含上义词。其次，把下义关系分析成为上义词和下义词之间的二分结构使得下义关系成为一个相对的概念，导致了一个下义关系中的下义词可能成为另一个下义关系中的上义词。这样就混淆了下义关系结构中不同层级的地位差异。再次，大多数下义关系研究局限于某一单个语言内部，而缺少对不同语言进行对比研究。最后，下义关系研究一般只涉及词汇意义关系，很少扩大到词级以上的语言上下文之中进行考察。本论文是从认知和语义的视角对上述问题进行系统的分析。论文共分四大部分：历史背景、文献综述、理论探索和语料分析。本文通过对相关历史背景的分析明确下义关系的基本定义，并对下义关系的研究提出了这样一个理论假设，即认知概念是人类共通的，并且以词的形式在不同语言中反映出来。因此，我们对下义关系的认知语义研究旨在系统考察词义的聚合关系，以及认知概念和词汇意义之间的相互关系。文献综述主要分析不同学科针对下义关系现象所采用的研究方法和取得的研究成果。语言学研究中的结构主义研究方法尽管具有其理论和实用价值，但是在对不同语篇上下文中的下义关系研究却存在不足。本文中的理论探索部分就是运用认知和语义的研究视角对下义关系进行三级分类研究，这种基于认知和语义的三级下义关系研究模式对于下义关系现象中存在的语义传递和不规则等特点可以进行更加全面和充分的描写和解释。有充足的证据表明，该研究模式能够更好地反映人类认知的分类特点，即人类将纷繁复杂的客观世界简化为有组织的分类范畴，并对之进行有系统的范畴化和概念化。本文的语料分析是针对三级下义关系研究模式的语料检测，包括对名词、动词、形容词等下义关系的分类，下义关系的英汉对比研究，以及下义关系在词组、句子、段落和语篇上下文之中的考察等。其中的英汉下义关系对比研究以及上下文之中的下义关系研究从不同侧面揭示了不同语言文化环境对于客观世界所采用的不同分类方式，以及人类语言和人类思维的相互关系。本项研究具有下列理论意义与实用价值。其理论研究成果主要在于对下义关系采用了认知和语义的综合研究视角，提出了三级下义关系的研究模式，进行了下义关系对比分析，并对下义关系在不同语言结构之中的表现进行了认知和语义考察。在理论方面，本文提出人类认知的范畴化和概念化以及人类语言中的词义关系可以通过对下义关系的认知语义研究进行考察，从而揭示概念与语词的相互关系。其次，本文提出的三级下义关系是对下义关系的结构主义传统的补充和完善。它既保持了上义词和下义词的二分结构，同时突出了下义关系中各个层级的不同地位。这样也就确立了下义词在三级下义关系中的核心地位，并且和人类学中的民俗生物分类和命名，心理学中的基本层次范畴和原型理论，以及英汉语言对比的实证研究保持一致。在实践方面，不同文化中的语言选择次序可以在三级下义关系结构中得到认知和语义解释。例如，汉语使用者优先选择单音节汉字，因为汉字的部首具有分类组织的作用，在汉字的构字结构和汉语的下义关系结构中均占据着重要的地位。最后，我们的下义关系研究从词汇意义关系还延伸到词组、句子和语篇结构。对下义关系在不同上下文中的考察表明，下义关系可以出现在不同的语言结构之中。也就是说，不同的语篇结构可以运用下义关系进行认知和语义分析。今后的下义关系研究需要进一步采用跨学科的综合研究视角，加强理论研究的深度和实证研究的广度。不仅要涉及词汇意义的纵聚合关系，还要涉及词汇意义的横组合关系。这样，我们对下义关系的研究就会取得更加全面的成果。更多还原

【Abstract】 Hyponymy refers to a paradigmatic lexical sense relationship between a generalterm and a specific term. The dissertation is a systematic study of hyponymy from acognitive-semantic perspective.The hyponymy-related notion can be surveyed in philosophy, cognitive science,and linguistics. Philosophically, the hyponymy-related notion dates back to Aristotlein terms of the relationship between the species ’man’ and the genus ’animal’. Thisspecies/genus inclusion is echoed in Humboldt’s philosophical investigation on thevariety of human languages and the intellectual development of human beings: man isborn with the tendency to classify concepts into categories of genus and species, so asto have a logically ordered human mind.The philosophical investigation is interested in the relationship between thereference part of word meaning and what is referred to in the world, rather than thesense relations between words. The cognitive interest in hyponymy is related to thehuman cognitive pattern, by means of which human beings categorize andconceptualize the world (Rosch 1973, 1976, 1978, Berlin 1973, 1976, 1978, WordNet).The linguistic analysis of hyponymy, however, constitutes an important part of thelexical sense relations in the traditional investigation of structuralist lexical semantics,on a par with synonymy, antonymy and meronymy. Linguistically, hyponymy haslong been recognized as one of the constitutive principles in the vocabularyorganization of all languages. The hyponymy-related notion is found in Saussure(1959 [1915]) & also in Trier (1932, 1934). More recent systematic study of iexicalsemantics in more or less the same tradition can be read in Lyons (1968, 1977) onStructural Semantics, Lehrer (1974) on Semantic Fields and Lexical Structure, Cruse(1986) on Lexical Semantics, Taylor (1996) on Linguistic Categorization: Prototypesin Linguistic Theories, and Pavlicic (a 2004 Columbia University PhD Dissertation)on The Organization of Verbs in Mental Lexicon.Of all the established authors in the study of hyponymy, Lyons (1968: 453, 1977:291) is recognized as the first linguist to create the terms: ’hyponymy’,’superordinate’ and ’hyponym’. And the notion of hyponymy as a vertical,paradigmatic relation of lexical sense that holds between a superordinate term and ahyponym and its co-hyponyms has been quickly accepted in linguistic analysis. Despite the great contributions made so far to linguistic study, there are somecontroversial issues to be clarified in the analysis of hyponymy. Firstly, there is nounanimous agreement on the direction of inclusion between the superordinate and thehyponym, i.e., whether the superordinate includes the hyponym, or vice versa.Secondly, the binary treatment of hyponymy into superordinate & hyponym termsmakes hyponymy a relative concept, as a hyponym in one hyponymy structure canbecome a superordinate in another, with the different status between various levels inthe hyponymy structure undifferentiated (or even neglected). Next, most of thehyponymy study is confined within a particular single language, without muchsystematic work done on a contrastive study between different languages. Finally,researchers seldom go beyond the lexical level in their study of hyponymy, to thehyponymy structures in supralexical contexts. The present dissertation is an attempt totackle these problems from a cognitive-semantic perspective.The dissertation is organized into four major parts: a historical survey, a literaturereview, a theoretical investigation and a linguistic data analysis. The historical surveyclarifies the definition of hyponymy & it is consequently assumed that human beingshave essentially the same universal thought or concept, which is uniquely lexicalizedin word forms in different languages. Therefore it is expected that acognitive-semantic study of hyponymy could not only characterize the paradigmaticrelations of lexical sense, but also capture the nature and structure of theinterdependence between concept and sense.The literature review is a survey of some major attempts in the study ofhyponymy in a number of disciplines, particularly structuralist approaches. Theyhave proved to be valuable in many aspects of linguistic studies, but more or lessimpracticable and not explicit enough to be applied to the study of hyponymy inlinguistic contexts. The theoretical investigation, therefore, is the development of atripartite division of hyponymy from a cognitive-semantic perspective. Thecognitively-motivated and semantically-based tripartite model of hyponymy provesto be a good mirror of the taxonomic status of human cognition, which representshow we bring order to the world by simplifying the overwhelming mass of information around us into hierarchically-organized categories.The linguistic data analysis is a test of our three-level model of hyponymy inlanguage. The case study of hyponymy basically involves various types of hyponymyconcerning nouns, verbs and adjectives. A comparative study of the English andChinese hyponymy is also conducted, which shows how different cultures makesense of the world by categorizing information in different ways. And it also showssomething about how human languages and minds work in the process. Finally, ouranalysis of hyponymy goes beyond hyponymy on the lexical level and moves on tostudy hyponymy on other structural levels.The major research findings in the present study on hyponymy can be broadlysummarized in term of the cognitive-semantic perspective in hyponymy study, thethree-level analysis of the hyponymy structure, the culture-specific preferences inhyponymy organization, and the behaviors of hyponymy in linguistic contexts.Theoretically, it is firstly assumed that the concept/word association could bedemonstrated in hyponymy, if it is studied in a cognitive-semantic perspective,incorporating our human cognitive categorization and conceptualization on the onehand, and the structuralist semantic sense relation on the other hand. Secondly, ourhyponymy triad complements the binary hyponymy in the structuralist tradition inthat it preserves the structuralist superordinate/hyponym division, and at the sametime reveals the different salience in the superordinate, hyponym and varietal levels.Practically, the tripartite hyponymy also accounts for the culture-specific preferencesin different languages, especially the Chinese speakers’ preference of themonosyllabic characters and the category-marking radicals in the formation ofChinese characters. Last, the syntagmatic considerations of hyponymy (the basicallylexical sense relation) in context show that hyponymy constitutes a basic principle innot only vocabulary organization, but also discourse analysis.It is therefore proposed that future studies on hyponymy should take an integratedapproach, incorporating all the available achievements in relevant disciplinary studies.And more serious attention should also be paid to the theoretical depth and empiricaladequacy of hyponymy analysis, so that both the paradigmatic and syntagmatic aspects of lexical sense relations should be taken into our considerations in futurestudies, in order to yield a full, rather than partial, answer to the question ofhyponymy.更多还原