#4741. 倒置と受動態化の共通点と相違点[word_order][passive][inversion][syntax][information_structure]


 倒置 (inversion) と受動態化 (passivisation) という2つの統語論的過程には共通した役割がある.本来的な主語以外の要素を,典型的に話題 (topic) を担う節頭の位置に動かすことができるということだ.換言すれば,2つの統語論的過程はともに話題化 (topicalisation) という語用論上の要求に応えてくれる手段なのである.
 一方,倒置と受動態化には,興味深い相違点がある.いや,相違というよりも相補といったほうが適切だろう.両者はタッグを組んで,うまいく問題を解決しているようなのである.Seoane (379) の議論を引用しよう.

. . . inversion and passivization operate in different syntactic environments: passivization applies to transitive verbs whereas inversion applies to intransitive and copular clauses. Empirical studies . . . have made manifest that the tendency of inversion to apply to intransitive clauses was already observed in OE, ME, and EModE, when intransitive verbs dominate in the inverted (XVS) order, while there is a predominance of transitive verbs in the non-inverted order (XSV, probably determined by the need to maintain the cohesion between V and O . . .). As argument-reversing constructions, therefore, passivization and inversion were in a nearly complementary distribution and passives were almost the only order-rearranging pattern available for transitive clauses.

 なるほど,倒置と受動態化は,それぞれ自動詞文と他動詞文を相手にするという違いはありながらも,語用論上の問題解決を目指しているという点では同じ方向をみているといえる.しかし,2つの過程には決定的に異なることが1つある.それは,倒置は有標な話題を作り出すが,受動態化が作り出す話題はあくまで無標であることだ.上の引用にすぐ続く1文を引用しよう (Seoane 379) .

However, the most significant difference between the two argument-reversing devices is that, even if they satisfy the same discourse constraints, inversion produces marked topics, while passivization is the only strategy reversing the order of clausal constituents and creating unmarked topics/subjects.


 ・ Seoane, Elenna. "Information Structure and Word Order Change: The Passive as an Information-Rearranging Strategy in the History of English." Chapter 15 of The Handbook of the History of English. Ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006. 360--91.

[ | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]

Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow