The Comparative Research Of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" And "Jiran A, Name B"

Corollary causality has always been a focus in the study of Chinese sentence, This article selects "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" and "Jiran A, Name B", based on the small triangle theory, to compare the two sentence patterns. The article collected 500 cases of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B", and 500 cases of the sentence pattern "Jiran A, Name B" from Beijing university respectively in modern Chinese corpus, then discussed and analyzed these cases.In terms of language form, through analyzing the statistics of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" and "Jiran A, Name B", "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" sentence is divided into "Yinwei A, Suoyi B", "Yinwei A, B", "A, Suoyi B", "B, Yinwei A", "B, Yinwei A" five kinds of language form; "Jiran A, Name B" sentence can be divided into "Jiran A, Name B", "Jiran A, Name B", "Jiran A, B" three forms of language. Then through the analysis of the location of A and B、the abbreviation and substitution of correlative, to watch the differences between "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" and "Jiran A, Name B" In terms of language form.In terms of meaning in language, first of all, researching the logic relationship of A and B clauses in the sentence of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" and "Jiran A, Name B". The logical relationship of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" is divided into from the cause to the effect and from the effect of abduction; The logical relationship of "Jiran A, Name B" is divided into causality and opposites. Second, the analyses mainly from two aspects of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" and " Jiran A, Name B" sentence on cognitive level. Two aspects are subjective conjecture level and objective reflection level, in the "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" sentence patterns, the understanding of the subjective conjecture level reflects is 0.5<P{B/A}≤1; The understanding of the s objective reflection level reflects is P{B/A}=1. Researching the sentence of "since A, then B", the sentence can be divided into four categories: the clauses of B is Interrogative sentence1, the clauses of B is Interrogative sentence2, the clauses of B is rhetorical question and the clauses of B is statements. In the aspect of subjective conjecture level, when the clauses of B isInterrogative sentence1, the sentence reflected understanding is 0<P{B/A}≤ 0.5; When the clauses of B is Interrogative sentence2, the sentence understanding is reflected by 0.5< P{B/A} ≤1; When the clauses of B is rhetorical question, this understanding is reflected by 0.5<P {B/A}≤1; When the clauses of B is statements, the sentence understanding is reflected by 0.5 <P{B/A}≤1. In the aspect of objective reflection level, when the clauses of B is Interrogative sentence1 the sentence understanding is reflected by P{A}=1, P{B}=1; When the clauses of B is Interrogative sentence2, the sentence understanding is reflected by P{B/A}=0.5; When the clauses of B is rhetorical question, this sentence reflects the understanding is P{B/A}=1; When the clauses of B is statements, the sentence understanding is reflected by P{B/A}=1. In the end, we comparative analysis the meaning differences in language of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B " and "Jiran A, Name B".In terms of pragmatic value, the causal logic relation of "Yinwei A, Suoyi B" is relatively strong, it emphasizes a kind of semantic connection, emphasize time sequence, commonly used repetition to enhance the language potential, through reversed the word order to supplement. Different context can produce different expression when you use "Jiran A, Name B", it mainly reflects in: can express discontented mood, active voice and negative tone.