英语论文哪里有？本文旨在深入探究其运作机制与特征，进而揭示英汉语言的本质属性，为普遍语法提供更多的语言事实依据，并帮助使用者加深对这类句式的理解，为语言应用提供更多的指导。
CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION
1.2 Significance of the study
This thesis,adopting the Cartographic Approach as its theoretical framework toanalyze the English-Chinese Split Questions,aims to realize both theoretical andpractical significance.
Theoretically,first,this study can effectively compare the differences andsimilarities between English and Chinese SQs,ranging from their syntacticrepresentations to their derivational mechanisms.Previous studies mainly focus on theanalysis of a single language and lack cross-language comparisons,which impedesthe portrayal of the SQ structure and the exploration of its nature.This paper providesa new research perspective for the syntactic study of SQs.It can not only effectivelydescribe the structure of English-Chinese SQs,but also offer insight into thecomparative study of this sentence formation.Second,every syntactic research iscommitted to reaching the level of explanatory adequacy.This thesis also strives forthis goal.Thus,it is devoted to the explanation of the differences and similaritiesbetween English-Chinese SQs,which helps to reveal the essence of English andChinese and elevates the scientific nature of this study.Furthermore,regarding theclause type of English and Chinese SQs,this thesis also represents a unified structurethat illustrates both languages,thereby building connections between the two.Thirdly,this thesis investigates the commonalities and differences between SQs and tries tofind out more linguistic facts to support the Universal Grammar(Chomsky 1995).
CHAPTER THREETHEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.1 Cartographic approach
Appropriate theoretical frameworks are fundamental to ensuring that a study candraw reasonable conclusions.From previous studies,it is evident that the concept offunctional heads,such as FOCUS,has been introduced into the study of SQs.Amongvarious theoretical frameworks of syntax,the Cartographic Approach is the mostrelevant to this aspect.
The Cartographic approach is an important branch of generative grammar.Theterm‘cartography’is of Greek origin and refers to the art or technique of map-drawing.When introduced into syntactic study,it serves as a metaphor for mappingthe distribution of a particular syntactic constituent in the corresponding syntacticstructure,mainly discussing the hierarchical structure of natural syntactic components.Cinque&Rizzi(2008)suggest that the Cartographic Approach represents an attemptto create maps as detailed and precise as possible for syntactic configuration.The keyinsight within it is that each distinct type of peripheral constituent occupies a uniqueposition at the edge of a dedicated functional projection(Radford 2023:217).Therefore,its core ideas meet the research requirements of this paper and can beregarded as the main theoretical framework of this study.
CHAPTER FOURAN ANALYSIS OF SPLIT QUESTIONS IN ENGLISH AND CHINESE
4.1 The syntactic representations of split questions in English and Chinese
Split questions are interrogative structures composed of two parts.They areuttered when a speaker tries to ask a question while providing a possible answer to thehearer.SQs have similarities and differences in syntactic representations betweenEnglish and Chinese;thus,this part centers on the description of their syntacticsimilarities and difference.Moreover,it discusses the connectivity effects and islandconstraints in English-Chinese SQs.
4.1.1 The syntactic representation in English
A split question consists of two parts:a wh-part led by a wh-question and a tagpart,with the tag providing a possible answer to the wh-question.The tag can be invarious simple forms,such as a simple NP,a coordinate structure,a PP,or a CP.Examples of split questions in English are given in(6):
(6)
a.What did Mary eat,an apple?
b.What did Mary eat,an apple or an orange?
c.Where did Mary buy this apple,at the grocery?
d.What did Mary say,that she would buy an apple at the grocery?
4.2 The analysis of the clause type and the answer of split question in English andChinese
There are at least four ways when people discuss the clause type.One approachis in terms of the distinction among declarative,interrogative,and imperativesentences.Cheng(1997)indicates that every interrogative sentence has to be typedeither by syntactic wh-movement operation or by the use of question particles.Forexample,‘What did you eat?’can be treated as an interrogative sentence due to themovement of the word what.It moves to the specifier position within CP and types the whole sentence as an interrogative question.When the hearer encounters thisquestion,he/she has to respond according to the meaning of what,like‘I ate an apple’.However,unlike traditional interrogative questions,in an SQ,the wh-word moving tothe leftmost part of the sentence does not determine the clause type of the wholesentence.Instead,it is the tag on the right side that plays this role.In other words,theanswer to an SQ is determined by the meaning of the tag,not by the wh-word.Thisleads us to wonder what gives rise to this phenomenon.Why is it that the tagdetermines the clause type of the whole sentence?How can we explain it?Thus,inthis section,we mainly explore the reasons behind the clause type of English-ChineseSQs.In addition,we will also analyze the corresponding answers for different typesof tags.
CHAPTER FIVECONCLUSION
5.1 Major findings of the study
Based on the Cartographic Theory,this thesis is devoted to a comparative studyon the structures of English-Chinese Split Questions.It elaborates on their similaritiesand differences in aspects such as their syntactic representation,clausal typingcondition,and derivational mechanisms.Prior to the in-depth analysis,this thesis firstconducts a literature review of the relevant studies on Split Questions in variouslanguages.Through this review,it can acquire a comprehensive understanding of thestructures of SQs and identify research gaps.This thesis finds that relevant studies onEnglish-Chinese SQs have certain drawbacks in explaining their derivationalmechanisms and rarely account for the reason for their distinctive clause type.Theserelevant studies also lack cross-language study.Therefore,after clarifying theresearch objectives,this thesis selects suitable research methods and applicable theoryframeworks to put forward its own solutions.The major findings can be summarizedas follows.
To begin with,this thesis makes a comprehensive analysis of the syntacticrepresentation of English-Chinese SQs.By comparing and analyzing their basicformations,it is found that although both English and Chinese split questions arecomposed of two parts:a wh-part led by a wh-question and a tag,the constituents ofthe tag are different.In English,there are no other constituents except the neededphrases;whereas in Chinese,the final particles must exist and the copula canoptionally appear.This is related to the nature of English and Chinese interrogativequestions,more specifically,to the different nature of their inflections.Chineseinterrogative questions,with no inflections,need final particles to convey thesyntactic and pragmatic information which can be expressed by English inflections.
reference(omitted)
