“把”字句的情状类型及其语法特征

本文从时间系统角度考察“把”字句动词的语义特征和句子的情状类型及其语法现象。能否作“把”字句的谓语动词，与动词的内部过程结构有密切的关系。动词［＋完成］［＋持续］的语义越强，能进入“把”字句作谓语的自由度越大。“把”字句由一个动作同指示该动作结果的行为和状态结合而成构成复变类情状，具有［－持续］［＋完成］［＋成就］的语义特征。“把”字句的一些语法现象都可由这些语义特征得到解释。本文最后分析了“把”字句的几种与句子语义特征有关的语法现象。     

形容词作状语、补语情况再考察

从语义平面考察形容词作状语、补语的情况,可以看到:形容作状语、补语同动词构成的句法结构不同,但和句中其它词语构成的语义关系相同;语义关系相同是由形容词在深层结构中与其它词语强制性的同现关系决定的;语义关系虽相同,但由于形容词所处的语法位置不同,使句子的语义表达显示出明显的差异。     

试论句模研究的对象、起点和基本原则——句模研究系列之一

本文首先在构建汉语句子语义系统的基础上指出,句模研究的对象不是句子的指称意义,而是句子语义平面的关系语义;接着在综述配价分析方法的基础上说明句模研究的总体思路应当是先分化、后综合,句模研究的起点不是形式化的配价结构,而是语义实体之间客观存在的各种认知联系;最后指出句模研究必须遵循形义结合、原型构拟这两大基本原则     

浅析句型охота+инф.

俄语中少数源自抽象名词的状态词与动词不定式构成的单部句 ,在语言实践中使用频率较高。文章从охота +инф .型句子的句法属性、聚合体、不定式体的使用、实义切分、语境等方面进行了阐释 ,以便学生全面掌握、正确灵活运用该句型。     

主宾互易的同义句

主宾互易的同义句是指。语义相同,即V两边的主语或宾语(N_1和N_2)位置互易,句义基本不变。主宾互易的同义句,根据主、宾语的语义特征,可以分为处所+V+存在者、处所+V+交通工具(或人),供用物+V+使用者,受事+V+工具、受事+V+时间,材料+V+材料等六种句类,本文将对这六种句类主、宾互易的情况作具体的描述。     

正确地安排句子成分

前面几讲主要谈了词和词组,下面几讲要谈汉语的句子成分和复句。句子是表达思想的语言单位。它由词或词组组成。它的内部可以划分为各种不同的成分。这一讲主要讲句子的主语、谓语和宾语。主语是一句话中被陈述、说明、判断的对象,常常是人或事物。谓语是一句话中对主语所作的陈述、说明、判断,表示人或事物“怎么样”,“干什么”或“是什么”。宾语是动词谓语所涉及到的人或事物。主语、宾语常由名词、代词来充当,谓语常由动词、形容词来充当。如:     

“被”字句的语体差异考察

“被”字句在不同语体中的分布及句法结构、语义特征都有差异。用“叫、给、让”来表示被动的句子只能出现在文艺语体中，并且“叫、让”后的宾语不可省略；在“为＋所”构成的“被”字句中，动词既可以是处置动词，也可以是判断动词和心理动词，并且不同类别的动词在“为＋所”“被”字句中的句法表现并不相同。文艺语体中“被”字后以带宾语为常见，而事务语体和科技语体中“被”字后以不出现名词性成分为常态；政论语体中，“被”字句的动词可以是光杆动词。     

中古汉语介宾短语“於／在＋处所”句法位置的变化

中古汉语介宾短语的句法位置较之上古有所不同,呈现前移的趋势.本文选取此期的六部作品对"於/在 处所宾语"的句法位置进行了穷尽式考察.研究表明:随着句子表义的日益精密,谓语动词所带宾语、补语及状语的复杂化是造成介宾短语"於/在 处所"前移的最主要原因,其次是语义的影响,语言内部的自身调节也会对介宾短语的位置产生一定的作用.     

“（在／当）＋P＋时／时候，Q”句式分析

“(在/当) P 时/时候,Q”句式是用已知事件发生的时间为参照来标示另一事件发生的时间。由于全句表述出发点不同,表述核心自然也有差别。“时候句”由于参照时段与参照时点的不同,句式获得了不同的语句功能,表达出不同的语义。不同表述功能下的句式在语法上存在着种种制约因素。     

反义词共现构式“X的Y的”的句法语义研究

反义词共现构式"X的Y的"是现代汉语中比较独特的一种语言现象。基于语料库对该构式的组构成分、句法特征及语义进行详细描写和分析,可以发现进入该构式的可变量"X"和"Y"主要是反义形容词、动词、名词和代词;该构式在句中主要充当主语、定语、宾语等句法成分;该构式有加合义、周遍义和选择义三种语义。加合义是该构式的基本义,周遍义是"部分代整体"转喻作用的结果,选择义则受句法环境压制使然。     

“您”主语祈使句的标记性表现

"您"作为祈使句主语系统中最高层次的标记项呈现出丰富的种种语法表现:对祈使句肯定式的制约主要表现为祈请事象常具有听者[ 受惠]特征;对强调式的制约主要表现在对强调标记的选择与对意志语气强度的限制两个方面;对否定式的制约主要表现为祈请事象常带[ 受损]性以及对否定标记的选择等方面."您"的标记性表现主要与其自身的表敬性及言语行为的礼貌原则有关系.     

论法律文书歧义句的负面影响、成因及消解

歧义句是指其意义存在两种或两种以上理解的句子。法律文书歧义句影响办案的效率,增加司法机关办案负担,损害有关当事人的利益。法律文书语言歧义句是由于词语的多义性、词义范围过大、结构多样性、语序不当、标点符号使用不当、施受关系不明和指代不明等原因造成的。法律文书歧义句可采用选用单义词语、追加语境,运用限制、标点符号、明确施受关系和指代对象等方法消解。     

试论现代汉语核心句的句义结构类型

作为语法研究的一个有顶组成部分，句义结构的类型研究必须要遵循语形语义相结合的基本原则，本根据区别性语义特征将现代汉语基础表义结构分为属性，方们，领属，识别，感知，自身动作，涉客动作等七小类，并采用谓词逻辑对各小类基础表义结构的内部语义配置式进行描写，指出现代汉语句子的语义成分是一个逐层概括的层级系统，现代汉语核心锯的语义结构有五种基本类型。     

中国死刑复核程序的检讨与改进

1980年以来,部分死刑案件核准权被下放使死刑复核程序名存实亡,立法上的疏漏和诉讼构造的缺失造成死刑复核程序难以起到最后的程序保障作用。试就完善立法、收回死刑核准权和改进死刑复核程序等三个方面的问题进行分析和探讨。     

陈述语气中第二人称主语与动词谓语的选择性研究

第二人称主语是陈述句的有标记主语.各类动词谓语与该主语共现时表现出不同的选择性:或整个类别受到高度限制,如自主动词等;或类别倾向于受限制,如状态动词等;或类别内部不同个体受限制情况不同,如变化动词等;或同一动词在不同语境中受限制情况不同,如某些关系动词.限制原因主要来自两个方面:违反陈述语气的语用要求或者组合构成其它语气.     

The Costs of Surviving Men's Prison Sentences

When men enter prison the lives of their partners change. This paper looks at men's prison sentences from the viewpoint of prisoners' partners. It examines the financial circumstances women find themselves in as the result of men's prison sentences as well as the social and personal consequences. It outlines the survival strategies women develop in the face of their difficulties and considers why the situation of prisoners' partners remains largely unacknowledged by state agencies and policy makers.     

The benefit and cost of prison in the UK. The results of a model of lifetime re-offending

With prisons in the UK reaching full capacity, and with similar trends in other European countries and the USA, there is much political debate about the efficacy of prison and community sentences. This paper aims to inform this debate by testing the hypothesis that prisons are an effective and efficient way of reducing re-offending. A rapid review of effectiveness studies was performed to determine the relative impact of prison and community sentences on re-offending. An economic analysis was undertaken to transform the estimates of effect into estimates of the economic efficiency of alternative sentencing options in the context of the UK. When compared with standard prison sentences, a number of community-based interventions and enhancements of standard prison sentences were found to save money, both for the public sector and for society more broadly. Diverting adult offenders from standard prison sentences to alternative interventions saves the UK public sector between ￡19,000 and ￡88,000 per offender. When victim costs are considered, diverting offenders from standard prison sentences saves UK society between ￡17,500 and ￡203,000 per offender. It was concluded that standard prison sentences are not an economically efficient means for reducing re-offending.

Just punishments: Guideline sentences and normative consensus

The federal sentencing guidelines prescribe ranges of sentences to be given to persons convicted of felonies in the federal criminal courts. The U.S. Sentencing Commission wrote the guidelines attempting to make sentences conform to community views of appropriate punishments, along with several other criteria. Employing data from a 1994 national sample of adult Americans, designed as a factorial survey, the degree of correspondence is shown between guidelines sentences and those desired by the American public. Although at the individual level only a modest degree of concordance was found, the central tendencies of public opinion (median sentences) were found to correspond quite closely to the guidelines sentences. The major points of disagreement centered around drug trafficking crimes: the guidelines prescribed very long sentences for those crimes and distinguished sharply among trafficking in heroin, powder cocaine, and crack, whereas median sentences desired by the public were much lower and did not distinguish sharply among trafficking in those drugs. We interpret the findings as indicating that the guidelines sentences conform reasonably closely to American normative consensus concerning the sentencing of federal felons.The research reported in this article was commissioned by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily endorsed by the Commission. Full expositions of the findings from the national survey used are given by Rossi and Berk (1995, 1997).     

Ordinary Sentences for Extraordinary Crimes

In comparison to sentences meted out by international tribunalsat Nuremberg, Tokyo and Arusha, and by domestic courts, sentenceshanded down at the International Criminal Tribunal for the formerYugoslavia (ICTY) have been inexplicably lenient. Factors thatmay have contributed to the high proportion of low sentencesat the ICTY include undue emphasis on mitigating factors, particularlythose of particular importance to the Tribunal, the use of pleaagreements, the absence of a separate sentencing hearing followingconviction and the practice of using global (rather than separate)sentences. To make sentences more proportionate to the crimescommitted, the objectives of sentencing should be clarifiedand re-evaluated. Greater weight should be given to deterrence.In assessing the gravity of the offence, the quantum of harmcaused to and suffering experienced by direct and indirect victimsof the crime merits more detailed evaluation. The importanceof mitigating circumstances (such as combating historical revisionism,pleading guilty, expressing remorse and voluntary surrender)should continue to be fully recognized but those factors shouldnot attract excessive weight. Plea bargaining and plea agreementsshould be encouraged because they are indispensable to the Tribunal,an institution with significant temporal, practical and resourcelimitations. The sentencing process should take place afterconviction. A sentencing Chamber should be obliged to statethe starting point of the sentence which it deems appropriateand then quantify the discounts it gives to each mitigatingfactor. Greater consideration should be given to imposing consecutiverather than concurrent sentences. The decision not to adoptsentencing guidelines represents a missed opportunity.     

Overkill? An Examination of Comparatively Excessive Death Sentences in North Carolina, 1990–2010

This study examines death/life capital sentences in one southern state, North Carolina, during the period 1990 to 2010 to determine the extent to which they are comparatively excessive/lenient. The study employs data derived from a variety of official sources on the population of capital trials in the state during this timeframe and follows the analytic techniques developed by David Baldus and his colleagues and by Paternoster and Kazyaka in their studies of comparative excessiveness in capital sentencing in California, Georgia, and South Carolina, respectively. The results show a substantial number of death sentences that meet the standard for excessiveness, but the data also show a nearly equal number of life sentences that may be deemed too lenient. The implications of these findings are discussed.