Relativization In English And Chinese Noun Phrases:a Contrastive Study From The Perspective Of Linguistic Typology

This dissertation, from the perspective of linguistic typology, makes a contrastive study on relativization in English and Chinese NPs (Noun Phrases). It focuses on studying the different relativization strategies, the similarities and differences between English and Chinese RCs (Relative Clauses) in syntax, semantic and pragmatic aspects, basing on the corpus of738instances of English RCs collected from two English novels and1044instances of Chinese RCs collected from four Chinese novels with the number of words totaling approximately233,894. For convincing analyses, three different Chinese translation versions of the738English RCs and three different English translation versions of738Chinese RCs are included. Guided by the framework of functional analysis, three different arguments in English and Chinese RCs are respectively testified and the conclusions are examined in translation versions, and "unmarked translation strategy" and "marked translation strategy" are proposed as well.The following major works are conducted:The first chapter is the introduction. It gives a thorough literature review, especially the shortcomings in present studies. Then it illustrates the significance and the main points of this study, its theoretical framework and its materials.The second chapter defines and classifies English and Chinese NPs. A semantic definition for RCs and the scope of this study are put forward. Indefinite noun phrases and NRC (non-restrictive relative clauses) in English and those taking verbs as the predicates or having complete syntactic structures in Chinese RCs are studied in this dissertation.The third chapter makes a contrastive study on different relativization strategies in English and Chinese, basing on the previous research of linguistic typology. It is found that the major similarities between the two languages lie in that both adopt the gap strategy and the pronoun-retention strategy. The differences between them lie in that the gap strategy is found in the relativization of Subject or Object in Chinese, which can be only used in DO(Direct object) and OBL(oblique) in English. And English takes the relative-pronoun strategy as the major strategy, which can not be found in Chinese. Furthermore, the main differences between the two lie in that there is an asymmetry in the relativization of Subject-modifying and Object-modifying genitive NPs in Chinese, while "whose" can be used in the relativization of Subject-modifying and Object-modifying genitive NPs in English.The fourth chapter discusses the syntactic derivation of relative constructions in English and Chinese guided by the promotion theory of relativization of Vries(2002). It is testified that Liu Lijin’s view on the syntactic derivation of relative constructions in English and Chinese is convincing: English and Chinese relative clauses share the same derivational schema:both languages involve operator/empty operator movement and head noun-raising. The major difference between them exists that Chinese needs one final additional movement in deriving Chinese RCs remnant movement of the relative clause to Spec-DP to derive structure A or to a position between determiner and the head noun to derive structure B.The fifth chapter focuses on the differences between English RCs and Chinese RCs in text. It is found that the number of definite noun phrases as the head noun in RCs is far higher than the indefinite noun phrases, and RRCs higher than NRCs, and the choice of relative pronouns has little concern with the nature of the head noun. It is also found that in Chinese, demonstratives and quantifiers used before the relative clause is a dominant order, and quantifiers put after the relative clause are to avoid ambiguity or to highlight the action or state of the head noun.The sixth chapter analyzes the similarities and differences between forms and functions of English and Chinese RCs and testifies the different three arguments on English and Chinese RCs. It is found that the basic function of Chinese RCs is to specify the head noun and to characterize the head noun, while its functions can be decreased by contextual factors. The restrictiveness of Chinese RCs can be seen as a continuum.The seventh chapter makes a survey on English-Chinese translation versions and verse versa. It further verifies the conclusions obtained in the previous sections and attempts to propose the "unmarked translation strategy" and "marked translation strategy".The eighth chapter is the conclusion. It summarizes the main content, the significance of this study and points out its shortcomings and the relative field to do in the future.