其他
高引论文｜国内外“语法化”研究TOP1-100
关注“语言学心得”公众号
后台回复“高引论文第15期”
可获取完整名单
以下排名和筛选依据“中国知网”引用数据
截止于2023年8月15日
国内高引论文（第15期）
TOP 1
语言的“主观性”和“主观化”被引频次 5353
沈家煊，中国社会科学院语言研究所摘 要 本文综述当前国外关于语言“主观性”(subjectivity)和“主观化”(subjectivisation)的研究情况。“主观性”是指语言的这样一种特性 ,说话人在说出一段话的同时表明自己对这段话的立场、态度和感情 ,“主观化”是指语言为表现这种主观性而采用相应的结构形式或经历相应的演变过程。重视这方面的研究跟近来语言学“人文主义”的复苏有关 ,特别是功能语言学、语用学、“认知语法”的兴起 ,使长期以来占主导地位的结构语言学和形式语言学所主张的“科学主义”受到挑战。文章首先对研究比较集中的三个方面作了介绍 ,即 1 )说话人的视角 (perspective) ;2 )说话人的情感 (affect) ;3)说话人的认识 (epis temicmodality)。对“主观化”的研究有侧重历时相和侧重共时相两种取向 ,前者以E .Traugott的“语法化”( grammaticalisation)研究为代表 ,后者以R .Langacker的“认知语法”为代表。本文对这两种取向的差异和相通之处作了介绍。
TOP 2
“语法化”研究综观被引频次 2917
沈家煊，中国社会科学院语言研究所摘 要 语法化研究是当前语言学发展的一个趋向,即把历时研究与共时研究重新结合起来,其着眼点是从语言的历时演变解释语言共时平面上的变异。本文对国外“语法化”研究的两条路子、已提出的语法化的各条规律、语法化程度深浅的判定、语法化的原因和条件等问题作了概括和评介。
TOP 3
词汇化与话语标记的形成
被引频次 1133
董秀芳，北京大学摘 要 本文分析"谁知道"和"别说"这两个话语标记的形成过程和功能,指出它们作为话语标记是词汇化的结果,并概括了话语标记形成中的一些规律。通过词汇化形成话语标记的过程是话语中经常连用的成分的组块化与一体化,其意义是话语意义的规约化和语义化。汉语的话语标记很多都来自包含动词性成分的结构,其最初的句法位置可以在小句首,也可以在小句末。话语标记倾向于保持自由的地位,不发生粘着化,在语形上可以存在变体形式。从话语标记的形成可以看到词汇化与语法化是密切相关的,二者可以有一致的演变结果,也可以在同一语言形式上相继进行。
TOP 4
近年来语法化研究的进展
被引频次 919
吴福祥，中国社会科学院语言研究所摘 要 本文从“语法化的单向性问题”、“语法化与仪式化”、“形式学派的语法化研究”、“语法化与语言接触”以及“主观化与交互主观化”五个方面 ,介绍近10年来国外语法化研究的进展。
TOP 5
语用原则、语用推理和语义演变
被引频次 874
沈家煊，中国社会科学院语言研究所摘 要 当今历史语义学的主流是探讨语义演变的动因和机制,这种探讨的一个重要方面是借鉴和采纳语用学的研究成果,初步的结论是,交谈双方遵循一定的语用原则(特别是“适量准则”)是语义演变的重要动因,语用推理和推导义的“固化”是语义演变的主要机制。本文是对近年来这方面研究情况的介绍。
TOP 6
“X说”的词汇化
被引频次 552
董秀芳，北京大学中文系摘 要 现代汉语中有一批两音节或三音节甚至多音节的“X说”已经成为词或正处在词汇化的过程之中,本文列举了未被词典收录的这类具有词汇性质的“X说”,讨论了其词性、功能及形成过程,认为这类词的形成是短语词汇化的结果,其语义演变方式——从言说义向认知义的转变——在汉语史上一再出现,具有一定的普遍性,符合人类由具体到抽象的认知模式。
TOP 7
指示词“这”和“那”在北京话中的语法化
被引频次 530
方梅，中国社会科学院语言研究所摘 要 本文通过对"这"和"那"在北京话共时系统中各种用法的描写,说明指示词用法的虚化轨迹和虚化的系统背景,以及"从篇章用法到句法范畴"的演变机制。基本结论是,北京话中的"这"已经产生了定冠词的语法功能,作为定冠词的"这"是指示词在篇章中"认同用"进一步虚化的结果。北京话里定冠词范畴的出现不是孤立存在,与这一现象并行的是数词"一"的不定冠词用法。指示词在北京话中的演变与南方方言经历了不同的途径。全文共四部分:一,"指示词+名词"组合中名词的指称属性。二,指示词功能的扩展。三,"这"、"那"虚化的不对称。四,语法化的系统背景和类型学意义。
TOP 8
汉语语法化研究的当前课题
被引频次 496
吴福祥，中国社会科学院语言研究所，广西大学语言学研究中心广西
摘 要 基于对国外语法化研究新进展的初步了解以及汉语语法化研究现状的粗浅观察,本文认为,在当前和未来的汉语语法化研究中下述四个课题需要着力研究:结构式语法化的研究、语法化模式的研究、话语标记语法化的研究以及与语法化相关的语义演变研究。
TOP 9
语法化的特征、动因和机制——认知语言学视野中的语法化研究
被引频次 459
王寅，四川外语学院外国语文研究中心严辰松，解放军外国语学院学报编辑部摘 要 语法化是语言演变的重要方面,是当代语言学(包括认知语言学)关注的重要课题之一。语法化的过程是:语言形式的意义从实义向虚义转变,其功能从实词向语法功能词、附着成分、词缀、乃至屈折形式演变。这一过程呈现单向、有序、抽象化和专门化等特征。高频率重复和惯常化是语法化的必要条件,它的动因包括语言接触、创新用法、误解和误用及语用因素。通常认为,语法化的机制是类推和重新分析,演变的方式有隐喻、转喻和主观化等。
TOP 10
词汇化二例——兼谈词汇化和语法化的关系
被引频次 441
王灿龙，中国社会科学院语言文字应用研究所摘 要 词汇化是指一个短语或由句法决定的其他语言单位在语言的发展演变中其自身变成一个稳固词项的过程。本文以汉语中的“恨不得”和“物色”为例,通过对它们词汇化过程的分析,试图揭示某些词汇化的机制和规律。文章还在此基础上简单探讨了词汇化与语法化的关系问题。本文认为,词汇化和语法化虽是两种不同的语言演变形式,但有的演变机制却为二者所共有,有的词汇化过程常常伴随着语法化,在宏观动因上它们也有很大的一致性。词汇化和语法化的研究应该纳入整个语言变化的框架内来进行,既要看到它们各自的特点,也要看到它们之间的联系,任何将它们割裂开来甚至对立起来的作法都不利于全面、准确地认识和把握语言的演变规律。
\ 作者分析 /
以100篇论文的所有作者为数据，高引作者（筛选）如下：
吴福祥、石毓智、张谊生、沈家煊、董秀芳、江蓝生、刘丹青、高增霞、李王寅、马清华、史金生、冯光武、齐沪扬、马贝加、方梅、严辰、王灿龙、张伯江等人。\ 单位分析 /
\ 篇名分析 /
\关键词分析 /
\ 期刊分析 /
关注“语言学心得”公众号
后台回复“高引论文第15期”
可获取完整名单
以下排名和筛选依据“SSCI”引用数据
仅选Web of Science核心合集
截止于2023年8月11日
国外高引论文（第15期）
TOP 1
Why is grammaticalization irreversible?
Cited frequency 234
Haspelmath M，Max Planck SocietyAbstract Grammaticalization, the change by which lexical categories become functional categories, is overwhelmingly irreversible. Prototypical functional categories never become prototypical lexical categories, and less radical changes against the general directionality of grammaticalization are extremely rare. Although the pervasiveness of grammaticalization has long been known, the question of why this change is irreversible has not been asked until fairly recently. However, no satisfactory explanation has been proposed so far. Irreversibility cannot be attributed to the lack of predictability, to the interplay of the motivating factors of economy and clarity, or to a preference for simple structures in language acquisition. I propose an explanation that follows the general structure of Keller's (1994) invisible-hand theory: language change is shown to result from the cumulation of countless individual actions of speakers, which are not intended to change language, but whose side effect is change in a particular direction. Grammaticalization is a side effect of the maxim of extravagance, that is, speakers' use of unusually explicit formulations in order to attract attention. As these are adopted more widely in the speech community, they become more frequent and are reduced phonologically. I propose that degrammaticalization is by and large impossible because there is no counteracting maxim of “anti-extravagance,” and because speakers have no conscious access to grammaticalized expressions and thus cannot use them in place of less grammaticalized ones. This is thus a usage-based explanation, in which the notion of imperfect language acquisition as the locus of change plays no role.
TOP 2
On contact-induced grammaticalization
Cited frequency 160
Heine B，University of CologneKuteva T，Heinrich Heine University DusseldorfAbstract Grammaticalization is based on universal strategies of conceptual transfer. Contact-induced language change on the other hand is an areally confined process resulting from specific historical events. What this suggests is that the two constitute quite divergent phenomena and, in fact, in the relevant literature they tend to be described as mutually exclusive processes. Accordingly, this literature abounds with discussions on whether some specific grammatical change is due to the former or the latter. The position taken in this paper is that the two are in no way mutually exclusive; rather, perhaps more often than not, they jointly conspire in triggering grammatical change.
TOP 3
On the grammaticalization of evidentiality
Cited frequency 119
Lazard G，49 Av Observ ，Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (EPHE) ，Ecole Normale Superieure (ENS) ，49 Ave Observ ，49 Av ObservatoireAbstract This paper discusses the conditions for the grammaticalization of evidentiality in different languages, with special attention to the languages of South Eastern Europe and the Middle East. In these languages, evidentially marked discourse is opposed to neutral discourse, while in some other languages, evidential markers are necessarily included in every verb form; and in others, evidentiality is only lexically expressed. The last section deals with the problem of cross-language comparisons of evidential systems. A few thoughts are presented on the question of how to build a set of concepts to be used as a tertium comparationis .
TOP 4
On discourse markers: Grammaticalization, pragmaticalization, or something else?
Cited frequency 115
Heine Bernd，University of CologneAbstract Discourse markers have been the subject of a considerable body of recent research. Most commonly, their genesis and development was described in terms of grammaticalization. But there were also alternative approaches to deal with their development, and the term pragmaticalization was proposed to account for features of discourse markers that pose a problem to grammaticalization theory.In the present paper it is argued that neither grammaticalization nor pragmaticalization are entirely satisfactory in the understanding of the nature of discourse markers. On the basis of recent work on Discourse Grammar (Kalten-bock et al. 2011; Heine et al. 2012) it is argued that the rise of discourse markers involves an operation called cooptation, whereby information units such as clauses, phrases, or words are transferred from the domain of sentence grammar to that of discourse organization.
TOP 5
A usage-based thory of grammatical status and grammaticalization
Cited frequency 111
Boye Kasper，University of CopenhagenHarder Peter，University of Copnhagen，MTU Reman Technol GmbH Magdeburg,Dept Engish German&Romance StudiesAbstract This article proposes a new way of understanding grammatical status and grammaticalization as distinctive types of linguistic phenomena. The approach is usage-based and links up structural and functional, as well as synchronie and diachronic, aspects of the issue. The proposal brings a range of previously disparate phenomena into a motivated relationship, while certain well-entrenched criteria (such as 'closed paradigms') are shown to be incidental to grammatical status and grammaticalization. The central idea is that grammar is constituted by expressions that by linguistic convention are ancillary and as such discursively secondary in relation to other linguistic expressions, and that grammaticalization is the kind of change that gives rise to such expressions.
TOP 6
Theory and method in grammaticalization [Theorie und Methode in der Grammatikalisierung]
Cited frequency 99
Lehmann C，University of ErfurtAbstract This paper reviews a couple of theoretical andmethodological issues in grammaticalization research, including in particularthe relationship of grammaticalization to the synchrony/diachrony contrast,unidirectionality and degrammaticalization, lexicalization, analogy, reanalysisand lateral conversion. There are misunderstandings, both in thegrammaticalization and in the anti-grammaticalization literature, of each ofthese issues. Grammaticalization, if construed appropriately, comprises ahomogeneous set of phenomena and therefore remains a unified field of researchand a worthy object of a linguistic theory.
TOP 7
Evidentiality Linguistic categories and grammaticalization
Cited frequency 96
Boye Kasper，University of CopenhagenHarder Peter，University of Copnhagen，MTU Reman Technol GmbH Magdeburg,Dept Engish German&Romance Studies
Abstract This article takes up two closely connected theoretical unclarities: the questions of what a linguistic category is, and what it means for linguistic elements to have grammatical rather than lexical status. The two issues are discussed with reference to the case of evidentiality.The point of departure is the problem of how to define a category: Definitions of categories like evidentiality tend to mix up the question of what unifies the category with distinctions between pragmatic and semantic meaning, between lexical and grammatical coding, and between main predication and ancillary modification. In this article, we try to demonstrate the drawbacks of a conception of evidentiality as a strictly semantic, grammatical or modification phenomenon. We argue that evidentiality should be understood basically as a functional-conceptual substance domain.Against this background, we reconsider the distinction between grammatical and lexical status. We present a functional account of grammaticalization according to which grammatical status arises when a meaning is coded as being secondary information. By separating the definition of functional-conceptual substance domains from the distinction between grammatical and lexical status, we try to show how a function-based approach can make the characteristics of categories and of grammatical status cohere without getting mixed up.
TOP 8
Defaults and indeterminacy in temporal grammaticalization: The ‘perfect’ road to perfective
Cited frequency 95
Schwenter A S，University System of Ohio，Ohio State University
Cacoullos T R，University of New Mexico
Abstract Adopting a grammaticalization path perspective on the envelope of variation, that is, the range of grammatical functions along the cross-linguistic perfect-to-perfective path, and employing the variationist comparative method, we compare use of the Present Perfect and Preterit in Mexican and Peninsular Spanish to identify the default past perfective form in each dialect. The linguistic conditioning of the variability provides evidence that the Present Perfect is becoming the default exponent of past perfective in Peninsular Spanish; in empirical terms, the default expression is the one appearing more frequently (combined effect of corrected mean and factor weight) in the most frequent and, crucially, the least specified contexts. The quantitative analysis of natural speech production—rather than elicited—data also suggests a different trajectory for perfect-to-perfective grammaticalization than the commonly assumed route via remoteness distinctions: the Present Perfect's shift from hodiernal to general perfective advances in temporally indeterminate past contexts.
TOP 9
Diachronic construction grammar and grammaticalization theory
Cited frequency 82
Noël D，University of Hong KongAbstract Grammaticalization theorists are becoming increasingly aware of the relevance of constructions to their discipline, to the point that one of its leading exponents has recently defined grammaticalization as the creation of new constructions. This is precisely the problem which construction grammarians engaging in diachronic research are addressing — or one they should be addressing, because to date diachronic construction grammar has not really taken off as a discipline. The question arises of whether grammaticalization theory could simply be turned into the historical branch of construction grammar, or whether diachronic construction grammar has its own raison d’être as a separate discipline. Since grammaticalization theoretical practice is fairly narrowly focused on the change of extant constructions along a path towards the grammatical end of the meaning continuum, there is a need for a wider discipline that also concerns itself with the primary emergence of constructions. Though grammaticalization presupposes ‘constructionalization’, the two developments need to be kept apart because not all constructions go on to grammaticalize.
TOP 10
The concepts of constructional mismatch and type-shifting from the perspective of grammaticalization
Cited frequency 77
Traugott C E，Stanford UniversityAbstract The concepts mismatch, type-shifting, and coercion are central to much recent work on cognitive linguistics. In a number of papers, Michaelis has investigated entity and event coercion (Michaelis 2003a, b, 2004 a, b). I address her question “what conditions favor the diachronic development of shift constructions” (Michaelis 2004a: 8) from the perspective of grammaticalization, with particular reference to the development of partitive constructions like a bit of apple into degree modifier constructions like a bit of a hypocrite . I show why these are different constructions, and conclude that the most important factors have to do with matching quantitative implicatures to already extant quantifying degree modifiers with NP heads, and with the strategies for expressing how much “pragmatic slack” (Lasersohn 1999) is available in computing denotations.
\ 作者分析 /
以100篇论文的所有作者为数据，高引作者（筛选）如下：
Haspelmath M、Heine B、Tagliamonte A S、Schwenter A S、Lehmann C、Diessel H、Kuteva T D、Arcy A、Boye Kasper、Harder Peter、Cacoullos T R、Croft W、Christiansen H M、Chater N、Harley H、Ritter E、Nick C、Tomasello M、Matras Y、Sakel J、Diewald G.
\ 单位分析 /
\ 篇名分析 /
\关键词分析 /
\ 期刊分析 /
以上为不完全统计，欢迎补充交流
欢迎转发扩散！
推 荐
2023-08-20
2023-08-20
2023-08-19
2023-08-18
2023-08-17
2023-08-16
2023-08-15
2023-08-13
2023-08-13
2023-08-12
2023-08-12
2023-08-11
欢迎加入
今日小编：的嘞着呢
审 核：心得小蔓
转载&合作请联系
"心得君"
微信：xindejun_yyxxd
点击“阅读原文”可跳转专栏