英语论文网

ly such a phrase.”即人们常会碰到不带by介词短语的被动句,即使它(by介词短语)被省略了,但在理论上总是可以填补出来的。
2.3.2.3 E. Judith Weiner和William Labov在一篇题为Constraits on the Agentless Passive的文章中指出:“Our use of theterm’agentless’does not refer to sentences that could not have anagent like‘They went home’,since no passive choice is possiblehere,butto sentences and contextswhere the existence of an agent isimplied but no information on his or her identity is expressed.”两位学者的论述不仅肯定了“无施动者被动句”的施动者虽未明确出现但总是隐含地存在的观点,而且还表明了这里所说的施动者是施受关系中的施动者的看法,这与本文提出的施受关系是对立统一关系的观点是完全一致的。
2.3.2.4 M. A. K. Halliday在An Introduction to FunctionalGrammar一书中,分析一对主、被动分句时表示,施动性特征的出现事实上是二者的区别,“The presence of an‘agency’fea-ture is in fact the difference a pair of clauses such as the glass brokeand the glass was(or got)broken:the latter embodies the feature ofagency,so that one can ask the question‘who,why?’, while theformer allows for one participant only.”
2.3.2.5对be(a)+-en的施动性表述得最直截了当的莫过于LilianeHaegeman,他在Introduction to Government&BindingTheory一书中提出:“The agent role is not absent in passive sen-tences, rather, it is absorbed by the passive morphology on theverb.”这就是说,被动句中的施动者不是不存在,而是被动词的被动形态,即我们所说的be(a)+-en所吸收了。
2.3.2.6与被说明的名词形成逻辑动宾关系的作后置定语的不定式,在其最小管辖范围内的表层结构中,施动者已经出现时,不可用to be (a) +-en。这一语言事实证明be(a) + en内含有施动者。下列例句之错原因就在这里。为便于读者明显地看到句子的错误,我们将内含的施动者提供在括号里,如:*(7)He would remember nothing to be done(by him).*(8)Mary’s boyfriend sent her a beautiful skirt to be worn(by her)on her birthday.*(9)I have no more tasks to be finished(by me)and I maymake a journey to Dalian.*(10)John has been married to a lady with no heart to begiven to him(by her).英语的这一句法限制在别的结构中也时有表现。为使读者通过横向联系加深对我们观点的认识,下面再举几例,稍作说明。如:*(11)There is no such a good student as he is.*(12)I’ll lend you what money that I have.*(13)Someone has built the garage.例(11)错在单数可数名词之前的no内含有a,它相当于not a;例(12)不正确是因为句中的what内含有that,它相当于all the...that;例(13)之不对是has built内含的结果存在意义与the的存在意义相冲突的结果。将错例(11)、(12)、(13)与错例(7)—(10)进行对照,be(a)+-en含有施动者的事实是无庸置疑的。综上所述,无论就语法意义在语法范畴中的地位与作用而论,https://www.ukessay.org还是就施受对立统一关系以及对语态标记式be(a)+-en语法意义的理论、实践的探索而言,我们的结论是:被动语态的语义实质就是be(a)+-en的本质语法意义———施动性,即含施动者的施动动作,被它说明的人、物为受动者这一必然性只是由施动性