【作者】 李敏；

【导师】 刘大为；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 语言学及应用语言学， 2006， 博士

【摘要】 本文研究了现代汉语的非现实范畴，即汉语如何从句法的角度来表达非现实这个问题。本文认为非现实范畴是一种跨语言的普遍范畴，是一种概括性更强、更高层次的范畴。它在世界语言中都有体现，表现出很强的共性。当然也存在某种程度上的差异性，但是作为一种语义-句法范畴这种差异是在可以理解的范围内的。正是基于这一基本理念，本文详细研究了非现实范畴在现代汉语中的体现。首先分析它的语义类型，区分出各种典型度不一样的非现实类型，然后再在此基础上讨论了它的形式。本文还集中讨论了各种将来时在非现实范畴中的地位。最后指出以后需要着重解决的问题。全文共分七章。 第一章是绪论，介绍了非现实范畴的定义、语言范畴化的特点、非现实范畴研究的重要意义以及本文的研究方法和理论背景。语言的范畴在不同的语言中有其统一性，但是也有歧异性，但是这都不成为抹杀范畴存在的理由。非现实范畴在语言中的表现也体现了范畴的这个特点。以往我们在概括句法规律的时候对非现实范畴的影响重视不够，加入了非现实范畴这个因素以后就需要重新审视我们对以往句法规律的概括。这是非现实范畴的研究意义。非现实范畴作为一种语义-句法范畴，使我们研究时采取了从意义到形式再到意义的方法。而在研究中，类型学的视野和认知语言学的理论方法是贯穿始终的。 第二章探讨了非现实范畴的类型学地位以及它和其他概念的区别和联系。非现实范畴在不同的语言中表现有些差异，但是这并不能成为否定其类型学地位的理由。非现实的研究和情态的研究有很紧密的联系。非现实研究的很多概念就直接来自情态研究的理论。严格地说，非现实的范围比情态研究的范围大。如果从语义上理解，将非现实范畴看成是一种情态也是可以接受的。但是非现实范畴的研究对象更为明确，成员更为清楚。非现实和虚拟语气也有差别，但是这种差别主要表现在句法上。非现实范畴作为一种语义-句法范畴，可以看成是比虚拟范畴更大的范畴。本章还介绍了汉语学界对汉语是否有反事实范畴的讨论。最后本章介绍了非现实范畴理论和心理空间理论的区别和联系，二者的研究对象有重合的地方，但是并不是完全一样。 第三章针对非现实范畴在世界语言中表现出来的差异性进行研究，证明这样的歧异性是可以理解的，非现实范畴在语言中还是表现出了很强的统一性。本章首先说明了非现实范畴是一个更有解释力的范畴，能够解释像时态这样的范畴所难以回答的问题。在非现实范畴的范畴化中，认知距离起到了很大的作更多还原

【Abstract】 This paper is a study on Irrealis in modern Chinese, namely on how Irrealis is expressed syntactically in Chinese. As a crosslinguistic universal category, Irrealis is more conclusive and in higher level. It’s embodied in World’s languages and shows great universalities. There are some discrepancies among languages but as a semantic-syntactic category, it’s quite understandable. Based on this concept, this paper thoroughly researches the syntactical realization of Irrealis in Chinese. We at first analyze its semantical sub-categories and conclude different Irrealis types with different typicality. Then the forms of Irrealis are explored. We also explore all kinds of future tenses and their status in Irrealis. At the end of the paper, we point out the issues to be addressed in the future. There are seven chapters in this paper.Chapter one is introduction. It introduces the definition of Irrealis, the characteristics of linguistic categorization, the significance of Irrealis study and this paper’s approach and theoretical background. Linguistic category has its universalities and its discrepancies among languages, but it can no be the reason to deny the existence of the category. Irrealis is no exception. In the previous syntactic study, we didn’t pay enough attention to the influence of Irrealis. We should re-examine some syntactical conclusions if Irrealis is taken into account. This is the significance of Irrealis study. Because Irrealis is a semantical-syntactical category, we adopt from meaning to form and then back to meaning approach, with Typology as our perspective and Cognitive Linguistics as our theoretical background through out our study.Chapter two discusses the typological status of Irrealis and its difference and connection with other terms. Its discrepancies in languages can’t negate its typological status. There is a close connection between Irrealis study and Modality study as we can see that many terminologies of Irrealis come from Modality study. Strictly speaking, the scope of target of Irrealis is wider than the modality’s. Semantically, it’s acceptable to consider Irrealis as a kind of modality. But Irrealis is more circumscribed. Irrealis is also different from Subjunctive mood, especially on syntactical aspect. Since Irrealis is a semantical-syntactical category, it can be considered as a bigger category than Subjunctive mood. This chapter also introduces the debate on whether Chinese has counter-factual category in Chinese linguistics更多还原