昨日の記事「#5670. なぜ英語には単数形と複数形の区別があるの? --- Mond での質問と回答より」 ([2024-10-24-1]) で,否定 (negation) の話題を最後に出しました.言語において否定とは何か.これはきわめて大きな問題です.論理学や哲学からも迫ることができますが,ここでは言語学の観点に絞ります.
言語学の用語辞典に頼ることから始めましょう.まず Crystal (323--24) より引用します.
negation (n.) A process or construction in GRAMMATICAL and SEMANTIC analysis which typically expresses the contradiction of some or all of a sentence's meaning. In English grammar, it is expressed by the presence of the negative particle (neg, NEG) not or n't (the CONTRACTED negative); in LEXIS, there are several possible means, e.g. PREFIXES such as un-, non-, or words such as deny. Some LANGUAGES use more than one PARTICLE in a single CLAUSE to express negation (as in French ne . . . pas). The use of more than one negative form in the same clause (as in double negatives) is a characteristic of some English DIALECTS, e.g. I'm not unhappy (which is a STYLISTICALLY MARKED mode of assertion) and I've not done nothing (which is not acceptable in STANDARD English). . . .
A topic of particular interest has been the range of sentence STRUCTURE affected by the position of a negative particle, e.g. I think John isn't coming v. I don't think John is coming: such variations in the SCOPE of negation affect the logical structure as well as the semantic analysis of the sentence. The opposite 'pole' to negative is POSITIVE (or AFFIRMATIVE), and the system of contrasts made by a language in this area is often referred to as POLARITY. Negative polarity items are those words or phrases which can appear only in a negative environment in a sentence, e.g. any in I haven't got any books. (cf. *I've got any books).
次に Bussmann (323) を引用します.論理学における否定に対して言語学の否定を,次のように解説しています.
In contrast with logical negation, natural language negation functions not only as sentence negation, but also primarily as clausal or constituent negation: she did not pay (= negation of predication), No one paid anything (= negation of the subject NP), he paid nothing (= negation of the object NP). Here the scope (= semantic coverage) of negation is frequently polysemic or dependent on the placement of negation, on the sentence stress . . . as well as on the linguistic and/or extralinguistic context. Natural language negation may be realized in various ways: (a) lexically with adverbs and adverbial expressions (not, never, by no means), indefinite pronouns (nobody, nothing, none), coordinating conjunctions (neither . . . nor), sentence equivalents (no), or prepositions (without, besides); (b) morphologically with prefixes (in + exact, un + interested) or suffix (help + less); (c) intonationally with contrastive accent (in Jacob is not flying to New York tomorrow the negation can refer to Jacob, flying, New York, or tomorrow depending which elements are stressed); (d) idiomatically by expressions like For all I care, . . . . Formally, three types of negation are differentiated: (a) internal (= strong) negation, the basic type of natural language negation (e.g. The King of France is not bald); (b) external (= weak) negation, which corresponds to logical negation (e.g. It's not the case/it's not true that p); (c) contrastive (= local) negation, which can also be considered a pragmatic variant of strong negation to the degree that stress and the corresponding modifying clause are relevant to the scope of the negation (e.g. The King of France is not bald, but rather wears glasses. The linguistic description of negation has proven to be a difficult problem in all grammatical models owing to the complex interrelationship of syntactic, prosodic, semantic, and pragmatic aspects.
この2つの解説に基づいて,言語学における否定に関する論点・観点を箇条書き整理すると次のようになるでしょうか.
1. 否定の種類と範囲
・ 文否定 (sentence negation)
・ 節否定 (clausal negation)
・ 構成要素否定 (constituent negation)
2. 否定の実現様式
・ 語彙的 (lexically): 副詞,不定代名詞,接続詞,前置詞など
・ 形態的 (morphologically): 接頭辞,接尾辞
・ 音声的 (intonationally): 対照アクセント
・ 慣用的 (idiomatically): 特定の表現
3. 否定の形式的分類
・ 内的(強い)否定 (internal/strong negation)
・ 外的(弱い)否定 (external/weak negation)
・ 対照的(局所的)否定 (contrastive/local negation)
4. 否定の作用域 (scope)
・ 否定辞の位置による影響
・ 文強勢による影響
・ 言語的・非言語的文脈による影響
5. 2重否定 (double negative)
・ 方言や非標準英語での使用
・ 文体的に有標な肯定表現としての使用
6. 極性 (polarity)
・ 肯定 (positive/affirmative) vs. 否定 (negative)
・ 否定極性項目
7. 否定に関する統語的,韻律的,意味的,語用論的側面の複雑な相互関係
8. 自然言語の否定と論理学的否定の違い
この一覧は,否定の複雑さと多面性を示しています.案の定,抜き差しならない問題です.
・ Crystal, David, ed. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008. 295--96.
・ Bussmann, Hadumod. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Trans. and ed. Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzizi. London: Routledge, 1996.
「#5656. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine をめぐる議論の略史」 ([2024-10-21-1]) の続編.2重属格 (double_genitive) の研究史をゆっくりと追いかけている.前回の続きの箇所として,Jespersen (§§1.52 [pp. 15--16]) を引用しよう.
1.52. Kellner recognizes three historical stages:
I. a castell of hers (from 14th c., Chaucer, &c.).
II. a knight of the dukes (not yet Chaucer, frequent in Caxton)
III. that berde of thyne (rare in Caxton, frequent later).
But he overlooks the fact that stage II is really found just as early as I (see Chaucer G 368 an officere of the prefectes), nor is it easy to see why stages I and II should not have sprung into existence at the same time, while there is nothing strange in the later occurrence of III. But Kellner rightly lays stress on the fact that only a few of the constructions admit the partitive explanation; he therefore suggests the name 'pseudo-partitive genitive', but both he and other scholars evidently think that those applications which cannot be explained partitively have developed through analogical extension starting fro the partitive use.
The partitive explanation is the only one recognized by Professor Sonnenschein, who says, §184: 'In sentences like He is a friend of John's there is a noun understood: of John's means of John's friends, so that the sentence is equivalent to He is one of John's friends. Here of means out of the number of.
Sonnenschein does not mention constructions like that long nose of his; but even if we omit them for the moment, the explanation cannot be strictly maintained, for an enemy of ours cannot be the equivalent of an enemy of our enemies, which would be taken in a different sense, just as an enemy of the French is not to be explained as an enemy of the French enemies. And if I say he is a friend of mine, I need not at all imply that I have more than the one friend, though of course it will often be understood in this way. To express the partitive sense we have the unambiguous expression one of my friends. There is a difference between the two sentences 'The General and some of his friends left the house' and 'The General and some friends of his left the house': while the former implies that he had other friends, the latter means only: 'the General and some people who were on friendly terms with him'.
If Einenkel is right that the English expression a friend of his is due to direct imitation of French, where he has found examples like un chevalier des siens, the ultimate beginning of the idiom is partitive, as shown by the French plural. Unfortunately there seems to be no English example old enough to go back to a period when it was possible to distinguish between the singular and the plural of the pronoun: in Old English it would have been, for instance, an dohtor of minum with the plural, and therefore, necessarily, a partitive sense, or an dohtor of minre with the singular, and therefore not partitive. The modern a daughter of mine may be either, as far as the forms is concerned.
But it is not at all certain that the construction came to England from France: it may just as well have come into existence independently of the French idiom. The construction with the genitive of a substantive, as in a friend of my wife's cannot, at any rate, be due directly to French influence, for the French have no such genitive.
この節の議論の要点を書き出すと,次のようになるだろう.
1. 部分属格説が主流
・ Kellner は3つの歴史的段階を指摘
・ しかし,Kellner の分析には疑問も残る
・ 多くの研究者が部分属格の用法から他の用法が類推的に発展したと考えている
2. 部分属格説の限界
・ Sonnenschein は部分属格説のみを認めている
・ しかし,この説明はすべての用法には適用できない
・ a friend of mine の mine は必ずしも複数の友人を含意しない
3. その他の論点
・ フランス語からの影響説も
・ 一方,独立して発展した可能性は排除できない
・ そもそも a friend of my wife's のように of の後ろに代名詞ではなく名詞句が来る構文に関してはフランス語の影響はあり得ない
・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part III. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954.
連日の話題だが,改めて2重属格 (double_genitive) について.
Jespersen (§§1.51--1.59 [pp. 15--23]) に "An old friend of Tom's" と題する詳しい考察がある.とりわけ冒頭の 1.51 では,この表現に関する研究史上の諸説が簡便に紹介されていて有用である.
1.51. These constructions are treated here, because the genitive is here as in the preceding sections a primary; but here, in contradistinction to the constructions mentioned hitherto, a possessive may be used in the same way, for we may say, "an old friend of yours | that old friend of yours." Much has been written on these constructions, which are so characteristic of English, see E. Beckmann, ESt 8.412 (who explains them from an imaginary and seemingly impossible combination a friend mine); L. Kellner in his ed. of Caxton B. XIX; Einenkel, Anglia 33.504; Trampe Bødtker, Christiania Vidsk. Selsk. 1908 no. 6.34; cf also my own GS §194, PG 111, S.P.E. Tract XXV. This tract was occasioned by Mr. Fowler's mention (in MEU 399), where he ranks that nose of his with certain other constructions as 'plainly illogical' and says: 'a friend of mine, i.e. among my friends, but surely not that nose of his, i.e. among his noses; so the logic-chopper is fain to correct or damn; but even he is likely in unguarded moments to let the forbidden phrases slip out'; so even Mr. Fowler reckons it among recognized idioms, sturdy indefensibles, as he terms them. The belief that there is something illogical in this idiom evidently rests on the assumption that of here has to be taken in its partitive sense, one of or among several. But of has several other meanings---in the N.E.D. they are entered under no less than sixty-three numbers---and it may be worth while to examine if another explanation than the partitive might not be admissible.
昨日の記事 ([2024-10-20-1]) でみたように,Jespersen は,以前の著書 Growth and Structure of the English Language では,この表現が部分属格の用法から派生したものとみていた.しかし,上の引用ではそうではない可能性に言及しており,実際にこの先の議論を読み進めていくと,そうではないと結論するに至っているのだ.この変節は何故だろうか.
2重属格表現は学説史の観点からも興味深い.
・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part III. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard, 1954.
・ Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 10th ed. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1982 [1905].
連日 a friend of mine のタイプの2重属格 (double_genitive) の表現に注目している.
・ 「#5647. a friend of mine --- 2重属格」 ([2024-10-12-1])
・ 「#5653. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine の2つの意味的特徴」 ([2024-10-18-1])
・ 「#5654. a friend of mine vs. one of my friends」 ([2024-10-19-1])
従来,of mine が果たしている機能について,部分用法 (partitive) と見る向きと同格用法 (appositive) と見る向きがあった.前者であれば "a friend of my friends" と,後者であれば "a friend, who is mine" とパラフレーズできる.後者の解釈をいぶかしく思う向きもあるかもしれないが,昨日の記事 ([2024-10-19-1]) で紹介した "this hand of mine" のような表現を説明するには都合がよい.
学史上,2つの解釈をめぐって議論がなされてきたが,例えば Jespersen (§194 [pp. 173--74]) は,部分用法を前提としつつも,同格用法にも言及している.全体として歯切れの悪い説明だ.以下に引用しよう.
194. Speaking of the genitive, we ought also to mention the curious use in phrases like 'a friend of my brother's'. This began in the fourteenth century with such instances as 'an officere of the prefectes' (Chaucer G 368), where officers might be supplied (= one of the prefect's officers) and 'if that any neighebor of mine (= any of my neighbours) Wol nat in chirche to my wyf enclyne' (ib. B 3091). In the course of a few centuries, the construction became more and more frequent, so that it has now long been one of the fixtures of the English language. A partitive sense is still conceivable in such phrases as 'an olde religious unckle of mine' (Sh.. As III, 3, 362) = one of my uncles, though it will be seen that it is impossible to analyse it as being equal to 'one of my old religious uncles'. But it is not at all certain that of here from the first was partitive; it is rather to be classed with the appositional use in the three of us = 'the three who are we'; the City of Rome = 'the City which is Rome'. The construction is used chiefly to avoid the juxtaposition of two pronouns, 'this hat of mine, that ring of yours' being preferred to 'this my hat, that your ring', or of a pronoun and a genitive, as in 'any ring of Jane's', where 'any Jane's ring' or 'Jane's any ring' would be impossible; compare also 'I make it a rule of mine', 'this is no fault of Frank's', etc. In all such cases the construction was found so convenient that it is no wonder that it should soon be used extensively where no partitive sense is logically possible, as in 'nor shall [we] ever see That face of hers againe' (Shakespeare, Lear I, 1, 267), 'that flattering tongue of yours' (As IV, 1, 195), 'If I had such a tyre, this face of mine Were full as lovely as is this of hers' (Gent. IV, 4, 190), 'this uneasy heart of ours' (Wordsworth), 'that poor old mother of his', etc. When we now say 'he has a house of his own', no one could think of this as meaning 'he has one of his own houses'.
2重属格は,部分用法を起源としながらも,歴史の途中から同格用法を発達させてきたようにみえる.後者の発達の契機は何だったのか,今後くわしく調べていきたい.
・ Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. 10th ed. Chicago: U of Chicago, 1982 [1905].
昨日の記事「#5653. 2重属格表現 a friend of mine の2つの意味的特徴」 ([2024-10-18-1]) に引き続き,double_genitive あるいは post-genitive の意味に迫る.今回は a friend of mine とその代替表現とされる one of my friends との意味論的な差異があるかどうかに注目する.
Quirk et al. (17.46) によれば,両表現は通常は同義だが,文脈によっては異なる含意 (entailment) を帯びるという.
The two constructions a friend of his father's and one of his father's friends are usually identical in meaning. One difference, however, is that the former construction may be used whether his father had one or more friends, whereas the latter necessarily entails more than one friend. Thus:
Mrs Brown's daughter [8] Mrs Brown's daughter Mary [9] Mary, (the) daughter of Mrs Brown [10] Mary, a daughter of Mrs Brown's [11]
[8] implies 'sole daughter', whereas [9] and [10] carry no such implication; [11] entails 'not sole daughter'.
Since there is only one composition called the War Requiem by Britten, we have [12] but not [13] or [14]:
The War Requiem of/by Britten (is a splendid work.) [12] *The War Requiem of Britten's [13] *One of Britten's War Requiems [14]
精妙な違いがあるようで興味深い.ところが,ここで最後に述べられている点,および昨日の記事で触れた主要部定性の特徴にも反する用例がある.例えば "that wife of mine", "this war Requiem of Britten's", "this hand of mine", "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's", "that son of yours" などだ.
Quirk et al. は,これらの例を次のように説明する."this hand of mine" は,ここでは "this one of my (two) hands" の意味ではなく "this part of my body that I call 'hand'" の意味である.また,先行する文脈で一度 "a daughter of Mrs Brown's" が現われていれば,それを参照する際に "the/that daughter of Mrs Brown's (that I mentioned)" ほどの意味で使われることがある.さらに,否定的・軽蔑的な意味合いを込めて "that son of yours" などという場合もある.つまり,例外的に決定詞が主要部に付されるケースでは,何らかの(意味論的でなく)語用論的な含意が加えられているということだ.
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
「#5647. a friend of mine --- 2重属格」 ([2024-10-12-1]) に続き,double_genitive あるいは post-genitive と呼ばれる,この妙な表現の意味的特徴を考えてみたい.
Quirk et al. (17.46) によれば意味的特徴は2つある.(1) of の後ろに来る名詞句が定的 (definite) であり人間 (human) であること,(2) 一方,of の前に来る主要部は不定的 (indefinite) であることだ.
. . . It will be observed that the postmodifier must be definite and human:
an opera of Verdi's BUT NOT: *an opera of a composer's an opera of my friend's BUT NOT: *a funnel of the ships
There are conditions that also affect the head of the whole noun phrase. The head must be essentially indefinite: that is, the head must be seen as one of an unspecified number of items attributed to the postmodifier. Thus [1--3] but not [4]:
A friend of the doctor's has arrived. [1] A daughter of Mrs Brown's has arrived. [2] Any daughter of Mrs Brown's is welcome. [3] *The daughter of Mrs Brown's has arrived. [4]
As a consequence of the condition that the head must be indefinite, the head cannot be a proper noun . . . . Thus while we have [5], we cannot have [6] and [7]:
Mrs Brown's Mary [5] *Mary of Mrs Brown [6] *Mary of Mrs Brown's [7]
なるほど a friend of mine のタイプの2重属格表現の各要素を主に定・不定 (definiteness) の観点から分析すると,上記の2つの特徴があることはわかった.だが,考えてみれば,これらは代替表現である one of my friends についても当てはまる意味的特徴である.この2種類の表現が意味的に異ならないとすれば,共存している意義は何なのだろうか.
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
現代英語には奇妙な所有格表現がある.my friend でも one of my friends でもなく,a friend of mine という,もってまわった言い方だ.専門的には2重属格 (double_genitive) と呼ばれる表現である(post-genitive と呼ばれることもある).
歴史的にみても興味深い構文で,中英語に初めて生起するが,その種は古英語にあったと主張する論者もいる.また,関連する構文として,古英語では不定冠詞と属格代名詞が名詞の前位置に並んで生起するものがあった.現代英語風にいえば *a my friend, *his a man の類いだ.この構文が古英語では許容されていたものの,後に許容されなくなったということは,新しい a friend of mine タイプの構文の出現と関係している可能性がある.
2重属格は,このように英語統語論の歴史でもたびたび注目されてきたが,まだ謎が多く残されている.歴史的に探っていくに当たって,まずこの構文に関して現代英語の事情を把握しておく必要がある.そのために Quirk et al. の該当節を抜き出してみよう.
The 'post-genitive'
5.126 An of-construction can be combined with a genitive to produce a construction known as the POST-GENITIVE (or 'double genitive'). In this construction, the independent genitive acts as prepositional complement following of:
some friends of Jim's ['some of Jim's friends']
that irritating habit of her father's
an invention of Gutenberg's
several pupils of his
But the independent genitive is not in this case elliptical. Rather, the post-genitive contrasts in terms of indefiniteness or unfamiliarity with the normal determinative genitive. Whereas [1] and [2] presuppose definiteness, the presupposition in [1a] and [2a] is one of indefiniteness:
Jim's friend [1] a friend of Jim's [1a] Joseph Haydn's pupil [2] a pupil of Joseph Haydn's [2a]
本ブログでは,2重属格について「#2082. 定着しなかった二重属格 *the knight of his」 ([2015-01-08-1]) でちらっと触れたにすぎない.目下,helwa の Discord コミュニティで盛り上がっている英文法の話題でもあり,今後注目していきたいテーマだ.
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
「#5633. 形容詞補文として to 不定詞が続く7つのタイプ --- Quirk et al. より」 ([2024-09-28-1]) に引き続き,同構文について.別の文法書を参照すると,異なる分類がなされている.今回は LGSWE (= Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English) の §9.4.5.2 を参照した.ここでは問題の形容詞の意味にしたがって,6タイプが区別されている.
9.4.5.2 Adjectives taking post-predicate to-clauses
CORPUS FINDINGS
- Only one adjectival predicate is notably common controling to-clauses in post-predicate position: (un)likely. This form occurs more than 50 times per million words in the LSWE Corpus.
- Other adjectival predicates occurring more than ten times per million words in the LSWE Corpus are: (un)able, determined, difficult, due, east, free, glad, hard, ready, used, (un)willing.
- Other adjectival predicates attested in the LSWE Corpus:
Degree of certainty: apt, certain, due, guaranteed, liable, (un)likely, prone, sure
Ability or willingness: (un)able, anxious, bound, careful, competent, determined, disposed, doomed, eager, eligible, fit, greedy, hesitant, inclined, keen, loath, obliged, prepared, quick, ready, reluctant, (all) set, slow, (in)sufficient, welcome, (un)willing
Personal affective stance: afraid, amazed, angry, annoyed, ashamed, astonished, careful, concerned, content, curious, delighted, disappointed, disgusted, embarrassed, free, furious, glad, grateful, happy, impatient, indignant, nervous, perturbed, pleased, proud, puzzled, relieved, sorry, surprised, worried
Ease or difficulty: awkward, difficult, easy, hard, (un)pleasant, (im)possible, tough
Evaluation: bad, brave, careless, crazy, expensive, good, lucky, mad, nice, right, silly, smart, (un)wise, wrong
Habitual behavior: (un)accustomed, (un)used
ここでは,それぞれのタイプの形容詞が用いられる場合に to 不定詞がどのような意味役割を担っているのか,という点については触れられていない.しかし,LGSWE の続く箇所にさらなる解説があるので,ぜひご参照を.
・ Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan, eds. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education, 1999.
10月が始まりました.大学の新学期も開始しましたので,改めて「hel活」 (helkatsu) に精を出していきたいと思います.9月下旬には,知識共有サービス Mond にて10件の英語に関する質問に回答してきました.今回は,英語史に関する素朴な疑問 (sobokunagimon) にとどまらず進学相談なども寄せられました.新しいものから遡ってリンクを張り,回答の要約も付します.
(1) なぜ英語にはポジティブな形容詞は多いのにネガティヴな形容詞が少ないの?
回答:英語にはポジティヴな形容詞もネガティヴな形容詞も豊富にありますが,教育的配慮や社会的な要因により,一般的な英語学習ではポジティヴな形容詞に触れる機会が多くなる傾向がありそうです.実際の言語使用,特にスラングや口語表現では,ネガティヴな形容詞も数多く存在します.
(2) 地名と形容詞の関係について,Germany → German のように語尾を削る物がありますが?
回答:国名,民族名,言語名などの関係は複雑で,どちらが基体でどちらが派生語かは場合によって異なります.歴史的な変化や自称・他称の違いなども影響し,一般的な傾向を指摘するのは困難です.
(3) 現在完了の I have been to に対応する現在形 *I am to がないのはなぜ?
回答:have been to は18世紀に登場した比較的新しい表現で,対応する現在形は元々存在しませんでした.be 動詞の状態性と前置詞 to の動作性の不一致も理由の一つです.「現在完了」自体は文法化を通じて発展してきました.
(4) 読まない語頭以外の h についての研究史は?
回答:語中・語末の h の歴史的変遷,2重字の第2要素としてのhの役割,<wh> に対応する方言の発音,現代英語における /h/ の分布拡大など,様々な観点から研究が進められています.h の不安定さが英語の発音や綴字の発展に寄与してきた点に注目です.
(5) 言語による情報配置順序の特徴と変化について
回答:言語によって言語要素の配置順序に特有の傾向があり,これは語順,形態構造,音韻構造など様々な側面に現われます.ただし,これらの特徴は絶対的なものではなく,歴史的に変化することもあります.例えば英語やゲルマン語の基本語順は SOV から SVO へと長い時間をかけて変化してきました.
(6) なぜ come や some には "magic e" のルールが適用されないの?
回答:come,some などの単語は,"magic e" のルールとは無関係の歴史を歩んできました.これらの単語の綴字は,縦棒を減らして読みやすくするための便法から生まれたものです.英語の綴字には多数のルールが存在し,"magic e" はそのうちの1つに過ぎません.
(7) Let's にみられる us → s の省略の類例はある? また,意味が変化した理由は?
回答:us の省略形としての -'s の類例としては,shall's (shall us の約まったもの)がありました.let's は形式的には us の弱化から生まれましたが,機能的には「許可の依頼」から「勧誘」へと発展し,さらに「なだめて促す」機能を獲得しました.これは言語の主観化,間主観化の例といえます.
(8) 英語にも日本語の「拙~」のような1人称をぼかす表現はある?
回答:英語にも謙譲表現はありますが,日本語ほど体系的ではありません.例えば in my humble opinion や my modest prediction などの表現,その他の許可を求める表現,著者を指示する the present author などの表現があります.しかし,これらは特定の語句や慣用表現にとどまり,日本語のような体系的な待遇表現システムは存在しません.
(9) 英語史研究者を目指す大学4年生からの相談
回答:大学卒業後に社会経験を積んでから大学院に進学するキャリアパスは珍しくありません.教育現場での経験は研究にユニークな視点をもたらす可能性があります.研究者になれるかどうかの不安は多くの人が抱くものですが,最も重要なのは持続する関心と探究心,すなわち情熱です.研究会やセミナーへの参加を続け,学びのモチベーションを保ってください.
(10) 英語の人称代名詞における性別区分の理由と新しい代名詞の可能性は?
回答:1人称・2人称代名詞は会話の現場で性別が判断できるため共性的ですが,3人称単数代名詞は会話の現場にいない人を指すため,明示的に性別情報が付されていると便利です.現代では性の多様性への認識から,新しい共性の3人称単数代名詞が提案されていますが,広く受け入れられているのは singular they です.今後も要注目の話題です.
以上です.10月も Mond より,英語(史)に関する素朴な疑問をお寄せください.
今回は,昨日の記事「#5634. eager-to-please 構文の古さと準助動詞化の傾向」 ([2024-09-27-1]) で触れなかったもう1つの構文,easy-to-please 構文について,その歴史的な特徴を考えてみます.
Fischer et al. (171--72) によれば,easy-to-please 構文には態 (voice) に関わる重要な問題がつきまといます.
The easy-to-please construction has undergone a number of changes. From around 1400, two slightly more complex variants of the construction are found. One has a stranded preposition in the subordinate clause, as in (28a). The other has a passive infinitive (28b).
(28) a þei fond hit good and esy to dele wiþ also
'They found it good and easy to deal with as well.' (Curson(Trin-C)16557)
b the excercise and vce [= 'use'] of suche ... visible signes [...] is good and profitable to be had at certein whilis [= 'times'] (Pecock,Represser,Ch.XX)
(28a) はまさに現代の easy-to-please 構文ですが,(28b) は不定詞部分が to be had のように受動態となっている部分に注意が必要です.この違いは何なのでしょうか.この論点について,現代英語に引きつけて具体的に解説しましょう.現代の He is easy to please. において,文の主語 he と不定詞として現われる動詞 please の統語意味論的な関係は,"he is pleased" あるいは "someone pleases him" ということになります.前者をとれば,能動態ではなく受動態の解釈となりますが,不定詞として現われる動詞自体は受動態の標示を帯びていないために,形式と機能に食い違いが生じてしまっています.この態の観点からみると,上記の (28a) よりも (28b) のほうが理に適っているように思われますが,どうなのでしょうか.
Fischer et al. (172) では,次のように議論が続きます.
The development in (28b) is reminiscent of that in the modal passive . . . , and some degree of mutual influence seems likely. Curiously, however, passive marking eventually became obligatory in the modal passive, but not so in the easy-to-please construction, where formal passives never became systematic and sometimes even disappeared again, as shown by the now-ungrammatical example in (29a). Fischer (1991: 175ff) suggests that formally passive infinitives tend to occur with easy-type adjectives when the relation between adjective and infinitive rather than between adjective and subjective is stressed (cf. 29a). In such cases, an adverb rather than an adjective is also often found, as in (29b).
(29) a when once an act of dishonesty and shame has been deliberately committed, the will having been turned to evil, is difficult to be reclaimed (1839, COHA)
b Jack Rapley is not easily to be knocked off his feet (1819, Fischer ibid.)
From this, one might speculate that passive forms failed to fully establish themselves in this context because the meaning the construction conveys is not always purely passive. As (30) illustrates, the subject of many easy-to-please constructions combines both patient-like and agent-like qualities. While the subject undergoes the action, its intrinsic qualities also contribute to how that action unfolds. The construction could therefore be analysed as marking middle voice.
(30) more experienced opponents ... can sometimes be tricky to play against. (BNC)
easy-to-please 構文と中動態という新たな関係が持ち上がってきた.
・ Fischer, Olga, Hendrik De Smet, and Wim van der Wurff. A Brief History of English Syntax. Cambridge: CUP, 2017.
・ Fischer, Olga. "The Rise of the Passive Infinitive in English". Historical English Syntax. Ed. D. Kastovsky. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1991. 141--88.
昨日の記事「#5633. 形容詞補文として to 不定詞が続く7つのタイプ --- Quirk et al. より」 ([2024-09-28-1]) で「形容詞 + to 不定詞」の様々なパターンを確認しました.7タイプへの区分はかなり細かいものですが,ここでは Fischer et al. に従い,大雑把粗に2タイプに区分しましょう.標題にあるとおり,eager-to-please 構文と easy-to-please 構文の2種類です (170--71) .
In the so-called eager-to-please construction in (22a), the main clause subject functions also as agent-argument of the infinitive. In the easy-to-please construction, the main clause subject corresponds to the patient-argument of the infinitive. The easy-to-please construction is therefore somewhat reminiscent of the modal passive . . . expressing a passive-like meaning without passive marking.
(22) a [Eager-to-please construction]
Andropulos was a bit reluctant to go (BNC)
b [Easy-to-please construction]
He was lying in wait in the hallway, where he was impossible to overlook (BNC)
いずれの構文も歴史は古く,すでに古英語より文証されます (171) .
Both the eager-to-please construction and the easy-to-please construction were already available in OE, as shown in (24) and (25), respectively. . . .
(24) ic eom gearo to gecyrrenne to munuclicere drohtnunge
I am ready to turn to monastic way-of-life (ÆCHom.I,35 484.251)
'I am ready to turn to a monastic way of life.'
(25) ðis me is hefi to donne
This to-me is heavy to do (Mart.5(Kotzor)Se.16,A.14)
'This is hard for me to do.'
おもしろいのは,前者の eager-to-please 構文は,古英語から安定的に文証されるのですが,後に法的な意味を帯びて,準助動詞へ発展したものが出てきていることです.Fischer et al. より続けて引用します (171) .
The eager-to-please construction has been essentially stable throughout the history of the language. It is interesting to note, however, that some adjectives in the construction developed into modal markers. A straightforward example is bound, originally meaning 'under a binding obligation' but now typically used to mark epistemic necessity.
ここでは be bound to の例が示唆されていますが,ほかの箇所では be sure to や be certain to にも言及があります.昨日の記事の内容とあわせて,味わっていただければ.
・ Fischer, Olga, Hendrik De Smet, and Wim van der Wurff. A Brief History of English Syntax. Cambridge: CUP, 2017.
Quirk et al. (1226--27; §16.75) に,"Adjective complementation by a to-infinitive clause" と題する項がある.
We distinguish seven kinds of construction in which an adjective is followed by a to-infinitive clause. They are exemplified in the following sentences, which are superficially alike:
(i) Bob is splendid to wait.
(ii) Bob is slow to react.
(iii) Bob is sorry to hear it.
(iv) Bob is hesitant to agree with you.
(v) Bob is hard to convince.
(vi) The food is ready to eat.
(vii) It is important to be accurate.
In Types (i--iv) the subject of the main clause (Bob) is also the subject of the infinitive clause. We can therefore always have a direct object in the infinitive clause if its verb is transitive. For example, if we replace intransitive wait by transitive build in (i), we can have: Bob is splendid to build this house.
For Types (v--vii), on the other hand, the subject of the infinitive is unspecified, although the context often makes clear which subject is intended. In these types it is possible to insert a subject preceded by for; eg in Type (vi): The food is ready (for the children) to eat.
いずれの構文も表面的には「形容詞 + to 不定詞」と同様だが,それぞれに固有の統語的,意味的な特徴がある.要調査ではあるが,おそらく歴史的発達の経路も互いに大きく異なるものが多いだろう.
目下 helwa リスナーからなる Discord 上の英語史コミュニティ内部における「ヌマる!英文法」チャンネルにて,He is sure to win the game. のような構文が話題となっている.この「sure + to 不定詞」の構文は,Quirk et al. によれば (iv) タイプに属するという.理解は必ずしもたやすくない.
・ Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman, 1985.
現代英語は固定語順の言語といわれる.例えば S, V, O の3要素に限って考えても,通常は S+V+O の並べ方しか許容されない.「通常は」確かにそうなのだが,近現代英語の詩,あるいはその他の修辞的な文脈においては,詩的許容 (poetic_license) によって語順規則を破ることが許されることがある.Crystal (98) がいくつかの語順について具体例を挙げている.
SVO the boy saw the man
OVS Johns I invited --- not Smith
VSO govern thou my song (Milton)
OSV strange fits of passion have I known (Wordsworth)
SOV pensive poets painful vigils keep (Pope)
ほかには,フィクションではあるが Star Wars のジェダイマスター,ヨーダの話す「ヨーダ語」 (Yodish) の語順がよく知られている.これについても Crystal (98) から引用しよう.
Sick have I become.
Strong am I with the Force.
Your father he is.
When nine hundred years old you reach, look as good you will not.
現代英語では SVO の語順があまりに自然で盤石であるため,そこから意図的に逸脱した語順は否応なく目立ち,むしろ修辞的な利用価値が高まる,といった事情があるように思われる.
語順 (word_order) については,最近「#5585. 『子供の科学』9月号で小5生からの「なぜ,日本語と英語では語順が違うのですか?」に回答しました」 ([2024-08-11-1]) の記事で取り上げた.また,今朝の heldio より「#1180. 『子供の科学』で日英語の基本語順について回答しました」もお聴きください.
・ Crystal, David. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. 2nd. Cambridge: CUP, 2003.
先日『子供の科学』9月号が発売されました.小学校3年生から中学生を読者層とする科学雑誌です.こちらの44頁にて,小学校5年生より寄せられてきた標題の素朴な疑問に回答しています.一言回答としては「古今東西,言語にはさまざまな語順があります」となります.
この質問については様々な媒体で取り上げてきましたが,今回は雑誌上で小学生に対して回答・解説するという初めての機会だったので,その点で頭を悩ませました.限られた紙幅で,何をどこまで伝えられるのか.易しく,かつ本質を突くような回答を探ってみましたが,はたして成功しているでしょうか.どのように読んでもらえているのか,気になるところです.
上記回答では英語が古くは現代の語順とは異なる語順をもっていた点にもちらと触れましたが,深掘りはできませんでした.この点に関心のある方は,ぜひ YouTube 「いのほた言語学チャンネル」より「英語の語順は大昔は SOV だったのになぜ SVO に変わったかいろいろ考えてみた.祝!!30回!」をご覧ください.
その他,本ブログでも語順 (word_order) 関連の話題はたびたび取り上げてきています.
[ 英語史における語順の変化・変異とその原因 ]
・ 「#3127. 印欧祖語から現代英語への基本語順の推移」 ([2017-11-18-1])
・ 「#132. 古英語から中英語への語順の発達過程」 ([2009-09-06-1])
・ 「#4597. 古英語の6つの異なる語順:SVO, SOV, OSV, OVS, VSO, VOS」 ([2021-11-27-1])
・ 「#4385. 英語が昔から SV の語順だったと思っていませんか?」 ([2021-04-29-1])
・ 「#2975. 屈折の衰退と語順の固定化の協力関係」 ([2017-06-19-1])
・ 「#4793. 多くの方に視聴していただいています!井上・堀田の YouTube 第30弾「英語の語順は大昔は SOV だったのになぜ SVO に変わったかいろいろ考えてみた」」 ([2022-06-11-1])
[ 基本語順の類型論 ]
・ 「#137. 世界の言語の基本語順」 ([2009-09-11-1])
・ 「#3124. 基本語順の類型論 (1)」 ([2017-11-15-1])
・ 「#3125. 基本語順の類型論 (2)」 ([2017-11-16-1])
・ 「#3128. 基本語順の類型論 (3)」 ([2017-11-19-1])
・ 「#3129. 基本語順の類型論 (4)」 ([2017-11-20-1])
・ 「#4316. 日本語型 SOV 言語は形態的格標示をもち,英語型 SVO 言語はもたない」 ([2021-02-19-1])
・ 「#3734. 島嶼ケルト語の VSO 語順の起源」 ([2019-07-18-1])
さらに,過去に書いてきた連載記事等も多々ありますので,リンクを張っておきます.
・ 英語史連載企画(研究社)「現代英語を英語史の視点から考える」の第11回と第12回
- 「#3131. 連載第11回「なぜ英語はSVOの語順なのか?(前編)」」 ([2017-11-22-1]) (連載記事への直接ジャンプはこちら)
- 「#3160. 連載第12回「なぜ英語はSVOの語順なのか?(後編)」」 ([2017-12-21-1]) (連載記事への直接ジャンプはこちら)
・ 知識共有サービス「Mond」での回答:「日本語ならSOV型,英語ならSVO型,アラビア語ならVSO型,など言語によって語順が異なりますが,これはどのような原因から生じる違いなのでしょうか?」
・ 「#3733.『英語教育』の連載第5回「なぜ英語は語順が厳格に決まっているのか」」 ([2019-07-17-1])
・ 「#4583. 『中高生の基礎英語 in English』の連載第9回「なぜ英語の語順は SVO なの?」」 ([2021-11-13-1])
・ 「#4527. 英語の語順の歴史が概観できる論考を紹介」 ([2021-09-18-1])
語順問題について改めて考えてみていただければ.
(以下,後記:2024/08/22(Thu))
・ 堀田 隆一 「なぜ,日本語と英語では語順が違うのですか? --- 古今東西,言語にはさまざまな語順があります」『子供の科学』2024年9月号,誠文堂新光社,2024年8月10日.44頁.
間投詞 (interjection) というマイナーな品詞は,おおよそ統語規則に縛られない唯一の語類ということで,どこか自由な魅力がある.定期的に惹かれ,この話題を取り上げてきた気がする.過去の記事としては「#3689. 英語の間投詞」 ([2019-06-03-1]),「#3712. 英語の間投詞 (2)」 ([2019-06-26-1]),「#3688. 日本語の感動詞の分類」 ([2019-06-02-1]) などを参照されたい.
今回は Crystal, McArthur, Bussmann の各々の用語辞典で interjection を引いてみた.
interjection (n.) A term used in the TRADITIONAL CLASSIFICATION of PARTS OF SPEECH, referring to a CLASS of WORDs which are UNPRODUCTIVE, do not enter into SYNTACTIC relationships with other classes, and whose FUNCTION is purely EMOTIVE, e.g., Yuk!, Strewth!, Blast!, Tut tut! There is an unclear boundary between these ITEMS and other types of EXCLAMATION, where some REFERENTIAL MEANING may be involved, and where there may be more than one word, e.g. Excellent!, Lucky devil!, Cheers!, Well well! Several alternative ways of analysing these items have been suggested, using such notions as MINOR SENTENCE, FORMULAIC LANGUAGE, etc. (Crystal)
INTERJECTION [15c: through French from Latin interiectio/interiectionis something thrown in]. A part of speech and a term often used in dictionaries for marginal items functioning alone and not as conventional elements of sentence structure. They are sometimes emotive and situational: oops, expressing surprise, often at something mildly embarrassing, yuk/yuck, usually with a grimace and expressing disgust, ow, ouch, expressing pain, wow, expressing admiration and wonder, sometimes mixed with surprise. They sometimes use sounds outside the normal range of a language: for example, the sounds represented as ugh, whew, tut-tut/tsk-tsk. The spelling of ugh has produced a variant of the original, pronounced ugg. Such greetings as Hello, Hi, Goodbye and such exclamations as Cheers, Hurra, Well are also interjections. (McArthur)
interjection [Lat. intericere 'to throw between']
Group of words which express feelings, curse, and wishes or are used to initiate conversation (Ouch!, Darn!, Hi!). Their status as a grammatical category is debatable, as they behave strangely in respect to morphology, syntax, and semantics: they are formally indeclinable, stand outside the syntactic frame, and have no lexical meaning, strictly speaking. Interjections often have onomatopoeic characteristics: Brrrrr!, Whoops!, Pow! (Bussmann)
他の用語辞典も引き比べているところである.あまり注目されることのない間投詞の魅力に迫っていきたい.
・ Crystal, David, ed. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008. 295--96.
・ McArthur, Tom, ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: OUP, 1992.
・ Bussmann, Hadumod. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Trans. and ed. Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzizi. London: Routledge, 1996.
間投詞 (interjection) というマイナーな品詞は,おおよそ統語規則に縛られない唯一の語類ということで,どこか自由な魅力がある.定期的に惹かれ,この話題を取り上げてきた気がする.過去の記事としては「#3689. 英語の間投詞」 ([2019-06-03-1]),「#3712. 英語の間投詞 (2)」 ([2019-06-26-1]),「#3688. 日本語の感動詞の分類」 ([2019-06-02-1]) などを参照されたい.
今回は Crystal, McArthur, Bussmann の各々の用語辞典で interjection を引いてみた.
interjection (n.) A term used in the TRADITIONAL CLASSIFICATION of PARTS OF SPEECH, referring to a CLASS of WORDs which are UNPRODUCTIVE, do not enter into SYNTACTIC relationships with other classes, and whose FUNCTION is purely EMOTIVE, e.g., Yuk!, Strewth!, Blast!, Tut tut! There is an unclear boundary between these ITEMS and other types of EXCLAMATION, where some REFERENTIAL MEANING may be involved, and where there may be more than one word, e.g. Excellent!, Lucky devil!, Cheers!, Well well! Several alternative ways of analysing these items have been suggested, using such notions as MINOR SENTENCE, FORMULAIC LANGUAGE, etc. (Crystal)
INTERJECTION [15c: through French from Latin interiectio/interiectionis something thrown in]. A part of speech and a term often used in dictionaries for marginal items functioning alone and not as conventional elements of sentence structure. They are sometimes emotive and situational: oops, expressing surprise, often at something mildly embarrassing, yuk/yuck, usually with a grimace and expressing disgust, ow, ouch, expressing pain, wow, expressing admiration and wonder, sometimes mixed with surprise. They sometimes use sounds outside the normal range of a language: for example, the sounds represented as ugh, whew, tut-tut/tsk-tsk. The spelling of ugh has produced a variant of the original, pronounced ugg. Such greetings as Hello, Hi, Goodbye and such exclamations as Cheers, Hurra, Well are also interjections. (McArthur)
interjection [Lat. intericere 'to throw between']
Group of words which express feelings, curse, and wishes or are used to initiate conversation (Ouch!, Darn!, Hi!). Their status as a grammatical category is debatable, as they behave strangely in respect to morphology, syntax, and semantics: they are formally indeclinable, stand outside the syntactic frame, and have no lexical meaning, strictly speaking. Interjections often have onomatopoeic characteristics: Brrrrr!, Whoops!, Pow! (Bussmann)
他の用語辞典も引き比べているところである.あまり注目されることのない間投詞の魅力に迫っていきたい.
・ Crystal, David, ed. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 6th ed. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2008. 295--96.
・ McArthur, Tom, ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: OUP, 1992.
・ Bussmann, Hadumod. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. Trans. and ed. Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzizi. London: Routledge, 1996.
分離不定詞 (split_infinitive) の歴史については,以下の記事で取り上げてきた(あるいはこちらの記事セットを参照).
・ 「#2992. 中英語における不定詞補文の発達」 ([2017-07-06-1])
・ 「#4976. 「分離不定詞」事始め」 ([2022-12-11-1])
・ 「#4977. 分離不定詞は14世紀からあるも増加したのは19世紀半ば」 ([2022-12-12-1])
・ 「#4979. 不定詞の否定として to not do も歴史的にはあった」 ([2022-12-14-1])
・ 「#4981. Reginald Pecock --- 史上最強の "infinitive-splitter"」 ([2022-12-16-1])
分離不定詞は,近代英語期半ばに一度下火となっていたが,18世紀末から19世紀にかけて徐々に復活を果たしてきた.とはいえ,必ずしも高頻度で用いられるようになったわけではない.もしかしたら19--20世紀にかけて少しずつ頻度が増していく可能性もあったかもしれないが,その可能性は規範文法家の猛烈な批判により潰されてしまったのである.19世紀中の経緯について Visser (Vol. 2, 1936--37) の解説を引用しよう.
When, towards the end of the eighteenth century, the usage was resuscitated in the written language, it soon spread with a remarkable rapidity, and in the nineteenth century it was to be found in the works of writers of every standing including several of great name. The usage, however, was of an occasional character so that one had to read hundreds of pages before finding an example. It is worth notice that one type of splitting, common in Middle English, was not revived, namely that with a (pro)noun between to and the infinitive, e.g. 'to hine finde', 'to þee defend', 'to temple go'.
The usage might have become general and more habitual instead of occasional in the course of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries but for the adverse judgment on it by grammarians. According to 1882 Fitzedw. Hall (On the Separation by a Word and Words of 'to' and the Infinitive) the earliest objection to this usage appeared in print in 1840), when Richard Taylor expressed his dissatisfaction with the idiom in the following words: "Some writers of the present day have a disagreeable affectation of putting an adverb between to' and the infinitive." In 1864 Dean Alford (The Queen's English p. 171) observes: "'To scientifically illustrate'. But surely this is a practice entirely unknown to English speakers and writers. It seems to me, that we ever regard the to of the infinitive as inseparable from its verb." In 1867 the idiom is also categorically condemned by Mason (English Grammar p. 181): "The to of an infinitive mood should never be separated from its verb by an adverb. Such phrases as, 'To rightly use', 'To really understand' are improper." It is noticeable that these early censurers, and many others with them for that matter, did not know of (or ignored?) the occurrence of the idiom in earlier English. The result of the disapproval so strongly expressed was that splitting the infinitives became one of the favourite taboos of the school-teacher, and that minor writers, or those that yet had to win themselves a name, afraid of running the risk of being censured for being ignorant of linguistic conventions, avoided it. Newspaper tradition used to be strong against splitting and sub-editors and correctors of the press were seduously (sic) watching for trespasses of this kind.
引用後半に "one of the favourite taboos of the school-teacher" とある通り,分離不定詞は,19世紀以来,英語に関する「不平不満の伝統」 (complaint_tradition) を最も典型的に体現する文法項目となったのである.
・ Visser, F. Th. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1963--1973.
「#5565. 中英語期,目的語を従える動名詞の構造6種」 ([2024-07-22-1]) で取り上げたように,動名詞の統語論については,発達過程において様々な語順やパターンがあり得た.
今回は Visser を参照し,-ing 形に意味上の主語が明示される場合と,意味上の目的語が明示される場合について,歴史的な統語パターンを挙げたい.各パターンについて,Visser が節を立てているので,その目次 (Vol. 2, xiii--xiv) を掲げるのが早い.ただし,Visser が取り上げているのは -ing 形に関する事例であり,動名詞のみならず現在分詞の例も含まれていることに注意が必要である.
THE SUBJECT OF THE FORM IN -ING
Type 'They doubted the truth of the boy's being dead'
Type 'It's a curious thing your saying that'
Type 'From the arysing of the sonne'
Type 'At the sun rising'
Type 'I hope it's all right me coming in'
Type 'Everybody was talking about you going over there'
Type 'They knew about it being so serious'
Type 'Don't talk of there being no one to help'
THE OBJECT OF THE FORM IN -ING
A. Object before the form in -ing
Type 'Thou desirest the kynges mordryng'
Type 'Excuse his throwing into the water'
Type 'Restrayne yow of vengeance taking'
Type 'To þi broþur burieng fare''
Type 'Hope-giving phrases'; 'his heart-percing dart'
Type 'The maner of þis arke-making'
Type 'His love-making struck us as unconvincing'
Type 'To be present at the iudgement geuing'
Type 'In dyteys-making she bare the pryse'
B. Object after the form in -ing
Type 'A daye was limited for justifying of the bill'
Type 'Wenches sitt in the shade syngyng of ballads'
Type 'He went prechynge cristes lay'
Type 'I slow Sampsoun in shakynge the piler'
'The reading the book' versus 'the reading of the book'
動名詞の統語論と関連して,先日の Voicy heldio の配信回2つも参照.
・ 「#1150. 動名詞の統語論とその歴史 --- His/Him speaking Japanese surprised us all.」
・ 「#1151. 動名詞の統語論はさまざまだった」
・ Visser, F. Th. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1963--1973.
標記について,宇賀治 (274) により,Tajima (1985) を参照して整理した6種の構造が現代英語化した綴字とともに一覧されている.
I 属格目的語+動名詞,例: at the king's crowning (王に王冠を頂かせるとき)
II 目的語+動名詞,例: other penance doing (ほかの告解をすること)
III 動名詞+of+名詞,例: choosing of war (戦いを選択すること)
IV 決定詞+動名詞+of+名詞,例: the burying of his bold knights (彼の勇敢な騎士を埋葬すること)
V 動名詞+目的語,例: saving their lives (彼らの命を助けること)
VI 決定詞+動名詞+目的語,例: the withholding you from it (お前たちをそこから遠ざけること)
目的語が動名詞に対して前置されることもあれば後置されることもあった点,後者の場合には前置詞 of を伴う構造もあった点が興味深い.また,動名詞の主語が属格(後の所有格)をとる場合と通格(後の目的格)をとる場合の両方が混在していたのも注目すべきである.さらに,動名詞句全体が定冠詞 the を取り得たかどうかという問題も,統語論史上の重要なポイントである.
・ Tajima, Matsuji. The Syntactic Development of the Gerund in Middle English. Tokyo: Nan'un-Do, 1985.
・ 宇賀治 正朋 『英語史』 開拓社,2000年.
先日,Voicy heldio で「#1139. イディオムとイディオム化 --- 秋元実治先生との対談 with 小河舜さん」をお届けしました.本編の冒頭で話題にしましたが,そもそもイディオム (idiom) とは何なのでしょうか?
上記の配信回でも参照した秋元 (33--34) によると,イディオムの定義は次の通りです.
イディオムの定義としては,意味上,統語上の基準に照らし合わせて,次のような特徴を持ち合わせたものと言える:
(i) 意味的不透明性,あるいは非合成性 (non-compositionality).イディオムの意味はその成分の総和から出てこない.よく知られている例として,
kick the bucket = die
がある.
(ii) 統語上の変形を許さない.すなわち,Chafe (1968) の言う 'transformational deficiency' である.上例のイディオムは「死ぬ」という意味では受動形は不可である:
*The bucket was kicked by Sam.
(iii) イディオム内の成分の語彙的代用はできない.すなわち,「語彙的完全無欠性」である.
have a crush on → *have a smash on
Numberg et al. (1994) はイディオム的意味が各成分に分配されていないイディオム(例:saw logs = snore)を 'idiomatic phrase',そしてイディオム的意味が各成分に分配されているイディオム(例:spill the beans = divulge the information) を 'idiomatic combination' と呼び,分けている.
ただし,ある表現がイディオムかどうかというのは,上記の条件から予想されるように自動的に,あるいはカテゴリカルに決まるような代物ではありません.イディオム性 (idiomaticity) という連続体の概念を念頭に置く必要がありそうです.
・ 秋元 実治 『増補 文法化とイディオム化』 ひつじ書房,2014年.
・ Chafe, Wallace. "Idiomaticity as an Anomaly in the Chomskyan Paradigm." Foundations of Language 4 (1968): 107--27.
・ Numberg, Geoffrey, Ivan A. Sag and Thomas Wasow. "Idioms." Language 70 (1994): 481--538.
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow