97129370 210
Abstract The theme of this graduation thesis is The Difference of Transitivity The thesis aims at the explanation of the acceptability differences between several types of constructions of Japanese and those of English concerning transitivity. It will be useful, to begin with, to make a distinction between two types of language: what Ikegami(1981) calls the DO language and the BECOME language. Verbs of the former may be characterized, approximately, as having the property of transitivity and those of the latter having the property of intransitivity. The following serve to illustrate this distinction. English verbs, like run and swim, imply the notion of GO, but their Japanese equivalents do not imply GO but DO (with the concept of intransitive verb). Besides, English verbs, like burn and count, predicates the notion of ACTION and ACCOMPLISHMENT of EFFECT, but their Japanese equivalents predicates only ACTION. Moreover, Ikegami(1982) distinguishes two types of languages, as English is HAVE language and Japanese is BE language. So influence trying to work on the recipient is strong in English verb compared with Japanese one. Second, the topic is the difference of English and Japanese causative/passive structure. In case of English, agent always tends to be showed even if the agent is not
life like medicine and key. It is got as if they are life. In case of Japanese, agent is not necessarily showed even if the agent is life. In addition, English causative/passive structure is direct, but Japanese accepts direct and indirect structure. That is, the power to the recipient that the agent has is strong in English but is weak in Japanese. Third, the point is that Japanese transitivity and English transitivity. Though the former tends to lower own transitivity, the latter tends to heighten itself. Finally, the difference of culture is important things. People in western Europe has an aggressive and a positive nature, while people in Japan has a passive and a negative nature. Western Europeans tend to claim their own rights and justice. On the other hand, Japanese tend to emphasize the cooperation and not to assert the own things. It is thought that this fact is relation to the difference of English and Japanese transitivity. As a result of these arguments, this thesis asserts that English transitivity is stronger than Japanese transitivity. In short, English and Japanese have the great differences.
12
Abstract 2 4 5 0. 6 1. (transitivity) 7 2. 7 2.1 8 2.2 8 2.3 9 2.4 BE HAVE 11 2.5 12 2.6 13 3. 3.1 13 3.2 14 3.3 15 3.4 16 3.5 17 3.6 18 4. 4.1 19 4.2 19 4.3 20 4.4 21 5. 5.1 21 5.2 22 5.3 23 6. 24 25d
( (1) a. I persuaded him to go. b. (2) a. But he wouldn t go. b. (1),(2) a b (1) (2) ( ) (3) a. I persuaded him to go, but he wouldn t go. ( 1981 : 268) b. (3b) (3a)
(transitivity) (4) a. Mary sang. ( 1991 : 89) b. Mary sang to the baby. c. Mary kissed the baby. d. Mary kissed the baby awake. (5) a. ( 1995 : 240) b. (ibid : 239) c. (4) a Mary b (to the baby ) a b c Mary kiss (the baby) kissed d kiss awake the baby a (5) a b a c a (1981)
2.1 (6) a. Winter has come. b. c.? (6a) Winter < > Winter Winter < > (6b) (6a) Winter < > < > < > < > < > (1981:256-261) (6c) (6a) < > (1986 : 257) < > < > < > < > (1986) < > < > < > 2.2 (7) John ran to the station. ( 1981 : 263) (8) John swam to the shore. (7) a.? b. ( ) (ibid : 264)
(8) a.? b. ( ) (1981) < > < > (7) run to the station (7a) ( ) (7b) (8) run, swim GO DO DO : 1981 GO DO 2.3
(9) a. I burned it, but it didn t burn. ( 1996 : 172) b. (10) a. I counted them, but it was impossible. b. (11) a. I helped John (to) solve the problem, but he couldn t (solve it). b. (9a)(10a)(11a) (9b)(10b)(11b) (1981 1996) < > < < > burn < > (9a) but it didn t burn < > (9b) (10)(11) < > < > < > (1996) < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < > (12) a. I killed him, but he didn t die. ( 1996 : 113) b. ( )
(13) a. I invited him, but he didn t come. (ibid : 214) b. ( ) (12) (13) (9)-(11) 2.4 BE HAVE (1982) < > < > < HAVE BE (14) a. Alysa has two children. b. ( ) b. With Alysa, (there) are two children. (14a) Alysa have (14a) (14b) have / (15) a. ( 1996 : 169) b. The room has two windows. (15a) have < > < > < > < > ( 1996) (15b) the room
/ BE HAVE have be have BE ( ) HAVE ( ) 2.5 (1986) (1990) 1 (16) a. I can see a ship in the distance. ( 1986 : 267) b. (17) a. What do you hear? b. (18) a. They gave us chicken. ( 1990 : 96) b. (16),(17) < > ( 1986 : 267) (18) ( 1990 : 96) SVOC SV ( 1986 : 268)
2.6 ( ) 3.1 (1998) ( ) causation( ) (19) a. I opened the door. 1998 : 120 b. (20) a. Mary killed John. b. (19),(20) (19 ) a. The door opened. 1998 : 120 b. (20 ) a. John died.
b. (19) (19 ) (19) (19 ) 3.2 (21) This medicine will make you feel better. ( 1998 : 137) (22) What makes you think so? (23) What took you to Alaska? (24) That explains it. (25) Cancer kills thousands of people every year. (ibid : 141) (26) This key opens the door. (ibid : 150) (21 ) (22 ) (23 ) (24 ) (25 ) (26 ) ( ) (21) ( ) you ( ) this medicine (25),(26) (22),(23) what
( ) ( ) (1998) (personification) (21) this medicine (22) what (23) what (1998) (24) that (25),(26) ( ) (21 ) ( ) ( ) (1991) (21)-(26) (21 )-(26 ) ( 1998 : 158) 3.3
(27) a. John built a new house. ( 1996 : 173) b. (28) a. John cut his hair. b. (29) a. I drove her home. ( 1982 : 98) b. (27a,b) ( ) ( ) (28),(29) (28b) (28a) John ( 1996 : 173) (29) (29b) (29a) have (have+np+v-ed) (28) a. John had his hair cut. 3.4 3.3 (30) a. The teacher was criticized by the student. ( 1997 : 7)
b. (31) a. The teacher was criticized his article by the student. b. (30) (31) (1997 : 12) (30) a. The student criticized the teacher. b. (31) (31a) criticize criticize (31a) (the teacher his article) ( 1997 : 12) (31b) (31b) have (31)a. The teacher had his article criticized by the student. (1997) HAVE (have+np+v-ed) < > < > have 3.5 3.4
(1990 : 59) (32) a. ( 1990 : 59) b. He will be astonished. (33) a. b. His hand was badly burned. (34) a. b. We are informed that the king was dead. (1990 : 61) ( by ) 3.6 ( )
4.1 BE (35) ( 1981 : 270) (36) (37) (ibid : 271) (35) ( 1981 1996) 4.2 HAVE ( ) (38)a. Mary rocked her baby (in the cradle). ( 1981 : 274) b. Mary rocked her baby into sleep.
(39)a. John deceived Mary. b. John deceived Mary out of her money. (ibid : 275) (38a),(39a) (38b),(39b) ( ) a ( 1981) (38b) (40) a. Mary sang to the baby. ( 1981 : 277) b. Mary sang to the baby to sleep. (41) a. John danced with Mary. b. John danced Mary weary. (40),(41) (40b) ( ) ( 1981) 4.3 ( 1981:277) )
(42) a. I sang.--------------------------- ( 1981 : 278) b. I sang to the baby. ----------- c. I sang the baby to sleep.--- (43) a. I struck at him.--------------- b. I struck him.------------------- c. I struck him dead.----------- (44) (=(35))------- (38) 4.4 5.1 (1986) < > < >
(45) You must eat this cake. ( 1986 : 282) (46) a. b. (ibid : 283) (45) (46) ( 1996) ( ) (1986 : 284) 5.2 5.1 vs
(1986 : 285-287) Yes/No Yes/No (speaker-oriented) / (hearer-oriented) ( ) 5.3 ( )
(1991 : 114) (3) (3) a. I persuaded him to go, but he wouldn t go. b. (3) 2.3 < > < > persuade he persuade < > < > (3a) (3) a. I persuaded him to go, and he would go. < > < > persuade he persuade < >
(1986) 257-298 (1981) (1982) < > < > 67-110 (1991) < > ( ) (1996) ( ) (1990) (1998) 107-203 (2000) / ( ) 167-207 (1991) ( ) 1-30 (1995) 234-273 (1997) 2-106 Emil Rodhe (1897) Transitivity in Modern English ( (1960) ) Langacker, Ronald W. (1991) Concept, Image, and Symbol Berlin/New York : Mouton de Gruyter 208-260