ContrastiveStudiesonErgativeSentencesinEnglishandChinesefromthePerspectiveofConstructionGrammar

LiYuanyuan

【Abstract】Ergative sentence is considered as a special pattern， has received lots of attention in both western and Chinese linguistics. The thesis systematically make a comparative study on English and Chinese ergative sentences from a new perspective-CG， which is the short form of Construction Grammar， and this theory was built up in the 1990s by Adele E. Goldberg and Paul Kay， etc.

【Key words】construction grammar； ergative sentences； ergativity

1. Literature Review

Generally speaking， verbs are usually divided into transitive verbs， which take objects， and intransitive verbs， which dont take. However， there are some verbs can be used as transitive verbs to focus on the persons who perform an action， and as intransitive verbs to focus on the thing affected by the action. Such verbs are divided into a new category-ergativity. And in recent years， ergativity as a special language form has been paid more and more attention by both western and Chinese linguists. For Chinese linguists， it is a comparatively new area to study. And this thesis adopts a new perspective to make contrasts between English and Chinese ergative sentences from Goldbergs CG theory.

2. Studies on English ergative sentences and Chinese ergative sentences

2.1 English ergative sentences

（1） The snow melted.

This sentence indicates that the snow changed into liquid from solid state. Obviously， the cause didnot come from the snow （the patient）. It must be kind of external power. The sentence may be written like： the sun melted the snow.（Subject+V+Patient）.

（2） The window broke.

In transitive form， Tom broke the window is acceptable. The window broke. is an ergative pattern showing there is no internal cause of the effect 'broke'. The structure type is 'Patient+V'.

（3） The kettle boiled.

'Boil' can be either a transitive verb or an intransitive one， however， the kettle boiled. belongs to the ergative sentence. 'kettle' is lifeless， and this expression indicates there's external cause to the effect.

（4） The car can't move.

This sentence can be correspond with table 3.4-1， X move. It shows that the change of the state 'car → can't move' is caused not by car's motion， but by external power.

（5） The books are printing.

In fact， the normal sentence pattern may be 'The books are being printed. In this sentence， it is emphasized that action of 'printing' is happening right now.endprint

Let's try to make a clear classification of the English ergative sentences：

Table 1

Sentences' Syntactic Structures Examples

Patient+V The snow melted./The window broke.

Patient+V+Place The kettle boiled in the kichten.

Patient+V+adverbial modifier The class begins in five minutes.

Patient+be+V-ing The photo is printing./ The coffee is boiling.

There-structure There+V There lived a poor man.

There+V+NP There happened one thing that amazed the world./ There once lived a king in Old Eygypt called Hufu.

From the above table， we can see that in our daily life， many ergative sentences are used instead of normal ones， which should have been considered following the traditional grammar.

Let's go further to the following classification of the Chinese ergativesentences：

2.2 Chinese ergative sentences

They have one distinct feature： the participation of auxiliary verbs， such as '著'， '了'， '过'. Let's see the exact examples from the following tables.

Table-2

Sentences Auxiliary Verbs Example Sentences Syntactic Structure

Here below some typical and Chinese ergative sentences are listed to illustrate Ergativity in Chinese language.

1） Ergative structure constructed by '...le（了）...' in Chinese.

（1）地板上堆了一堆书。

A pile of books are on the floor./There are a pile of books on the floor.

The following sentences are frequently discussed by Chinese linguists. Let's try to analyze the sentence from the construction grammar view.

（2）王冕七岁时死了父亲./七岁时王冕的父亲死了。

His father died when Wang Mian was seven years old.

Traditionally， scholars always try to analyze these two sentences from the perspetive of semantics or syntacs. Maybe it will be more clear in grammar theory. However， according to Goldberg's CG theory， contructions are pairings of form and meaning. We can see clear that the meanings of these two sentences are different. The first sentence“王冕七岁时死了父亲” indicates that his father died became Wang Mian's loss. And “七岁时王冕的父亲死了。” doesn't convey such meaning.

Here we can analyze this sentence from a new perspective-construction grammar theory.

（3）心伤了。

Heart broke./Her heart was broken by her boyfriend.

Pay attention '了' here used. It is a symbol which emphasize the 'finishment' of the action '伤'. And it is also a symbol of ergative sentence in Chinese.

2） Ergative Structure constructed as 'Subject（patient） + Predicate + 了'.endprint

（1）“ 一个人死了。”/一个人被杀了。

'死了' in the sentence not only serves as predicate of the sentence， but also symbolizes the result/effect of the whole thing. “一个人死了” or “死了一个人” is almost same in Chinese meaning. Here the sentence structure can be analyzed as ' Subject（patient） + Predicate + 了' . And in such sentence structure， the result is more emphasized. That's one reason why the author of the sentence choose this ergative pattern.

（2）“房叔”（被）揭发了。

‘Uncle House （was） denounced.

The subject（actor） of this sentence， or we say， the predicate （“揭发”） is omitted. Such sentence syntactic structure can be ‘Subject （Patient） + Predicate. And this sentence is an ergative structure in Chinese language.

（3）襪子破了。（袜子被穿破了。）

Stockings broke.

Syntactically speaking， stockings is used here as subject， while of course， not the actor. The sentence syntactic structure can be ‘Subject （patient） + Predicate.

Conclusion： '着'， '了'， '过' these words are auxiliary verbs which are particularly used in Chinese ergative sentences. While through observation， we can conclude that the subjects in the constructions generally are the lifeless objects. Verbs are directly put behind them to show the effect. And the concept of patient must be distinguished from the concept of actor， which is often expressed in a certain way. Therefore， in the sentence “刘胡兰被敌人杀害了”， “被”is put in front of the verb “杀害”. And such sentences with 'bei' in Chinese language are also considered to be typical ergative sentences.

Table 4

Chinese ergative sentence structure English ergative sentence structure

Patient+Subject+Verb+着/了/过

Patient+Subject+被+Verb

Subject+被+Verb+Object

Patient+Verb+Object

Subject+Adverbial+Verb+Object

Subject+Time Adverb+Verb

Subject+Adverbial+Verb+Complement+Object

Patient+Subject+Verb（complex predicate） Patient+Subject+Verb

Patient+Subject+Verb+Place

Patient+Subject+Verb+Adverbial Modifier

Patient+Subject+Verb-ing

There-construction

3. Contrastive study from the perspective of CG

3.1 The production of ergative sentences

According to Goldberg's definition， ergativity as a special grammar phenomenon， is classified into the category of constructions. There is a table in Goldberg（2006：5）， which can directly show this point.

Table 5. Examples of constructions， varying in size and complexity

The procedure in Figure 1 shows that production of ergative sentences will be effected by the three elements： context， surrounding and cultural background. Thus， these newly-born sentences can be known and accepted by human brain. All these sentences together form the final cognitive envrionment.endprint

From these sentences listed， we can make a conclusion that no matter it is a Chinese ergative sentence or an English one， the cognitive process is unavoidable. The production and application of each sentence should finally emerge into our cognitive environment. That is to say， as a construction， no matter an eargative word， or an ergative sentence， in either English language or in Chinese language， it should be cognitive and acceptable by human brain.

3.2 Explanations of the similarities of ergative sentences

Let's summarize the similarities of English and Chinese ergative sentences from the following aspects：

3.2.1 Same constructional system

Both the English and Chinese ergative sentences have the same constructural systems， in which the complement of a transitive verb and the subject of an intransitive verb are assigned the same case. By extension， some verbs （like break， boil，etc.） can occur in two different sentences， where the original object seems to have the same THEMATIC ROLE in the two sentences even though on the surface it is object in one sentence and subject in the other.

3.2.2 Same constructional approach

As disscussed before， ergativity is used to describe a grammatical pattern inwhich the subject of a transitive clause is treated in the same way as the object of a transitive clause. Both English and Chinese ergative sentences are made up by same constructual approach， which means the subject （actor） is always omitted. While in such sentences， patients and verbs are directly used.

3.3 Explanations of the differences of ergative sentences

Although English and Chinese ergative constructions both belong to 'ergativity' pattern， there are great differences. From their surface pattern， we can conclude that the sentence pattern， the constructional roles： the subject， predicate， and even the modifier are different. While there still exists some other differences.

According to what we have already discussed， English ergative sentences and Chinese ergative sentences have different elements of production and application.

3.3.1 Different experience background

As known to all， both English and Chinese languages are not typically ergative ones. We can see the trendency that there will be more ergative uses in these two languages. Even in the same language systems， different sentences are produced under different exprience background of human beings. For instance， in Chinese language， we may use “黑板擦擦” ，“桌子/凳子擦擦”in the classroom context. But we donot say “書擦擦”，“报纸擦擦”， etc. And in English， we say 'the car can't move'， 'the donkey can't/doesn't move' ，etc. However，'books can't move' is not accpetable， as it is not in accord with experience background.endprint

3.3.2 Different language environment

Obviously， in the perspective of speaking environment， English and Chinese ergative sentences are used in different language environment. And even when people speak a single language， there will be numerous language envrionments. While the language environment is different， ergative sentences produced and used are different in surface form and ways of expressing.

By comparison， Chinese ergative sentences use more '了，著，完' etc. Strictly speaking， '了，着，完' is typical Chinese Mandarim language habit. In English ergative sentences， there are even no such words or symbols which may symbolize tenses.

3.3.3 Different semantic roles

From the analysis of ergative verbs in English and Chinese， we can find that the semantic roles of the verb in these two languages are surely different， as the syntactic structure in English and Chinese is quite different.

4. Conclusion

Ergative sentences， exist in both Chinese and English languages， are considered special sentence types. According to Goldberg's Constrution Grammar， all the sentences of ergativity in the two languages can be understood as pairings of form and meaning. That is to say， as constrution units， the reason why they present ergativity is because they want to show coherence meanings.

In conclusion， the semantic construction of English object is simple， only showing the logical verb-object relation. While in Chinese ergative sentences， its more complicated. And the complements of English are simple， mainly describing the state of the subject. While the functions of complements of Chinese are more complex.

References：

[1]Adele E.Goldberg.1995.CONSTRUCTIONS：A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure[M].Chicago：The University of Chicago Press.New York：Oxford University Press.

[2]Adele E.Goldberg，2003.Constructions：a new theoretical approach to language[J].Trends in Cognitive Sciences，2003，7（5）：219-224.

[3]Adele E.Goldberg.2006.Constructions at Work（The nature of generalization in language）[M].Oxford：Oxford University Press.

[4]Adele E.Goldberg.2009.The Nature of Generalization in Language[J].Cognitive Linguistics 20-1（2009），93-127.Walter de Gruyter.

[5]Alan Taylor.1976.'Ergative-Based' or 'Transitive-Based'？[J].Foundations of Language，1976，14（1）：1-17.

[6]张培基.英译中国当代散文选（二）[M].上海：上海外语教育出本社，2007.

[7]赵艳芳.认知语言学概论[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社，2002.endprint