| Based on the Three-domain Theory,this paper investigates the marked adversative complex sentences which are classified by semanteme,and analyzes their expressions in content domain,epistemic domain and speech-act domain.This paper consists of five chapters.The main contents of each chapter are as follows:The first chapter is the introduction.This part briefly introduces the purpose,the significance,the research object,and the scope of this paper,reviews the preview studies of the semantic relationships in adversative complex sentences,especially,the main achievements of using the Three-domain Theory to study complex sentences,and explains the methods and materials we used in this paper.The second chapter classifies the marked adversative complex sentences semantically on the basis of previous studies.Three types exists in complex sentences:contradictory adversative complex sentences,comparative adversative complex sentences,and supplementary adversative complex sentences.The third chapter is the main part.In this chapter,we investigate the three semantic types of marked adversative complex sentences according to the Three-domain Theory.First,we study the contradictory adversative complex sentences.(1)They can be divided into two types by their formal characteristics: one can express the adversative relationship without transitional markers,and the other cannot express the adversative relationship without transitional markers.(2)Contradictory adversative complex sentences are the most typical type of them.Therefore,the three domains of this type is the clearest and most comprehensive,which can be understood in content domain,epistemic domain and speech-act domain.Second,we analyze the comparative adversative complex sentences.(1)According to the different results of comparison,they can be divided into opposite adversative complex sentences and differential adversative complex sentences.(2)The opposite adversative complex sentences can only show whether there are differences between the two comparatives items or not,but not degree,grade or range of differences.Adversative relationship in these sentences is completely due to adversative markers,and these sentences can only be understood in epistemic domain and speech-act domain.(3)Comparative results of the two comparative items in differential adversative complex sentences can reflect significant differences,and comparative relationships in them are also given by comparative markers.These sentences can also be understood in the epistemic domain and speech-act domain only.Third,we explore the supplementary adversative complex sentences.(1)According to supplementary contents,supplementary adversative complex sentences can be divided into general supplementary adversative complex sentences and restrictive supplementary adversative complex sentences.(2)Adversative relationships in supplementary adversative complex sentences result in adversative markers,and these sentences can only be understood in the epistemic domain and speech-act domain.(3)Because restrictive condition is often accompanied by speech acts such as command and request,most of the restrictive supplementary adversative complex sentences can be understood in the speech-act domain.The fourth chapter lists some adversative complex sentences that are ambiguous in the three domains.They can be roughly divided into intersection and homograph.(1)Since Three-domain is not a dualist category,it needs to be extended and virtualized gradually from content domain to speech-act domain.Hence,the intersection of different domains is inevitable in this process.(2)Homograph is the result of treating adversative complex sentences in isolation.In actual communication,the context is unique and certain,which will not lead to homograph.The fifth chapter is the conclusion.We summarize this research,and point out our shortcomings and the direction of efforts in the future. |
