《柯羅克語言學自選集》的作者ANTHONY·KROCH是美國當代著名語言學家，當代美國最負盛名的語言學家CHOMSKY和LABOV都曾汲取過他的研究成果。《柯羅克語言學自選集》是作者的自選論文集，是作者的學術成果在中國首次正式出版，內容涉及歷史句法、形式語法和社會語言學，其中許多世界範圍內的語言學研究產生過重大影響。
基本介紹
- 書名：柯羅克語言學自選集
- 作者：柯羅克 (Kroch A.)
- 出版日期：2001年5月1日
- 語種：簡體中文, 英語
- ISBN：7561909349
- 外文名：Studies in General Linguistics:Selected Papers by Anthony Kroch
- 出版社：北京語言文化大學出版社
- 頁數：526頁
- 開本：32
- 定價：36.00
基本介紹,內容簡介,作者簡介,圖書目錄,文摘,
基本介紹
內容簡介
《柯羅克語言學自選集》北京語言文化大學出版社出版。
作者簡介
作者：(美國)柯羅克
圖書目錄
To the Chinese readers 1
導讀：美國歷史句法學家柯羅克
Ⅰ . HISTORICAL SYNTAX
01. Reflexes of Grammar in Patterns of Language Change 1
02. Morphosyntaetic Variation 71
03. Syntactic Change 105
04. The Middle English Verb-second Constraint: A Case Study in Language Contact and Language Change 152
05. The Rise of Do-support in English: Implications for Clause Structure 199
06. Pseudocleft Connectivity: Implications for the LF Interface Level 223
Ⅱ . FORMAL SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS
07. Amount Quantification, Referentiality, and LongWh- movement 284
08. The Linguistic Relevance of Tree Adjoining Grammar 305
09..Asymmetries in Long Distance Extraction in a Tree Adjoining Grammar 423
Ⅲ. SOCIOLINGUISTICS
10. Toward a Theory of Social Dialect Variation 469
11. Dialect and Style in the Speech of Upper Class Philadelphia 499
導讀：美國歷史句法學家柯羅克
Ⅰ . HISTORICAL SYNTAX
01. Reflexes of Grammar in Patterns of Language Change 1
02. Morphosyntaetic Variation 71
03. Syntactic Change 105
04. The Middle English Verb-second Constraint: A Case Study in Language Contact and Language Change 152
05. The Rise of Do-support in English: Implications for Clause Structure 199
06. Pseudocleft Connectivity: Implications for the LF Interface Level 223
Ⅱ . FORMAL SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS
07. Amount Quantification, Referentiality, and LongWh- movement 284
08. The Linguistic Relevance of Tree Adjoining Grammar 305
09..Asymmetries in Long Distance Extraction in a Tree Adjoining Grammar 423
Ⅲ. SOCIOLINGUISTICS
10. Toward a Theory of Social Dialect Variation 469
11. Dialect and Style in the Speech of Upper Class Philadelphia 499
文摘
著作權頁：
插圖：
Given the existence of variable directionality with adposi-tions, we clearly need an explanation for the absence of variationwith verbs and nouns; but one is available that is consistent withour general thesis: Suppose that verbs and nouns differ from adposi-tions in never, on the surface, appearing in their underlying headposition but always moving to a functional head higher up in thestructure. If this claim can be maintained, the surface position ofverbs and nouns will always reflect that of the functional heads towhich they move rather than their base positions; and since thesefunctional heads are single formatives, they will always have thesame position relative to the other elements of the sentence. Then,the variability we find with adpositions is in need of explanation,since they might also be expected to move to a functional head. Aswe have noted, however, adpositions are often considered to befunctional categories; and if they are, their variability in direction-ality is expected. It is beyond the scope of this paper to defend inany detail the hypothesis of obligatory head movement of lexical cat-egories, a task that we must leave to future research. It is worthpointing out, however, that for verbs, the position we have outlinedis exactly the one proposed in Johnson (1991). He argues that allEnglish verbs move to a functional head below Tense, which hecalls t~, giving analyses of particle verbs and of double object verbsthat depend on this movement. To the extent that Johnson's analysisor one like it is well-motivated for verbs and can be extended tonouns, the absence of directionality variation in these categories willturn out to be consistent with the highly morphological approach tosyntactic variation that we have defended.
插圖：
Given the existence of variable directionality with adposi-tions, we clearly need an explanation for the absence of variationwith verbs and nouns; but one is available that is consistent withour general thesis: Suppose that verbs and nouns differ from adposi-tions in never, on the surface, appearing in their underlying headposition but always moving to a functional head higher up in thestructure. If this claim can be maintained, the surface position ofverbs and nouns will always reflect that of the functional heads towhich they move rather than their base positions; and since thesefunctional heads are single formatives, they will always have thesame position relative to the other elements of the sentence. Then,the variability we find with adpositions is in need of explanation,since they might also be expected to move to a functional head. Aswe have noted, however, adpositions are often considered to befunctional categories; and if they are, their variability in direction-ality is expected. It is beyond the scope of this paper to defend inany detail the hypothesis of obligatory head movement of lexical cat-egories, a task that we must leave to future research. It is worthpointing out, however, that for verbs, the position we have outlinedis exactly the one proposed in Johnson (1991). He argues that allEnglish verbs move to a functional head below Tense, which hecalls t~, giving analyses of particle verbs and of double object verbsthat depend on this movement. To the extent that Johnson's analysisor one like it is well-motivated for verbs and can be extended tonouns, the absence of directionality variation in these categories willturn out to be consistent with the highly morphological approach tosyntactic variation that we have defended.
