評論
打印
So, a problem in explaining how children learn language,
所以在解釋孩子們如何學習語言時候，有一個問題
a problem in teaching language to adults so that they don't make grammatical errors,
同樣也是教成人學外語語法時的一個問題
and a problem in programming computers to use language is which verbs go in which constructions.
以及給電腦編使用語言的程序時--在哪個構式里該用哪個動詞？
For example, the dative construction in English.
比如，英語中的與格構式--
You can say, "Give a muffin to a mouse," the prepositional dative.
可以說“Give a muffin to a mouse”，前置詞與格，
Or, "Give a mouse a muffin," the double-object dative.
或者“Give a mouse a muffin”，雙賓語與格，
"Promise anything to her," "Promise her anything," and so on.
“Promise anything to her”，“Promise her anything”，等等。
Hundreds of verbs can go both ways.
上百的動詞可以兩用。
So a tempting generalization for a child, for an adult, for a computer
對于孩子，很容易去做的一個歸納--對于大人和電腦來說也一樣--
is that any verb that can appear in the construction,
就是任何可以在下面這個構式中出現的動詞
"subject-verb-thing-to-a-recipient" can also be expressed as "subject-verb-recipient-thing."
“主語-動詞-物體-to-a-接受者”也可以表達成“主語-動詞-接受者-東西”。
A handy thing to have, because language is infinite,
這是很順手的事，因為語言是無窮的
and you can't just parrot back the sentences that you've heard.
對于你學過的句子不能只是鸚鵡學舌。
You've got to extract generalizations so you can produce and understand new sentences.
你必須得做出歸納，這樣你才能制造、理解新句子。
This would be an example of how to do that.
這就是這樣做的一個例子
Unfortunately, there appear to be idiosyncratic exceptions.
不幸的是，這方面有例外。
You can say, "Biff drove the car to Chicago," but not, "Biff drove Chicago the car."
你可以說，“Biff drove the car to Chicago”，但不是“Biff drove Chicago the car”。
You can say, "Sal gave Jason a headache," but it's a bit odd to say, "Sal gave a headache to Jason."
你可以說：“Sal gave Jason a headache”，但“Sal gave a headache to Jason”就很別扭了。
The solution is that these constructions, despite initial appearance, are not synonymous,
原因是這些構式，盡管一開始相似，但并不是同義句。
that when you crank up the microscope on human cognition, you see that there's a subtle difference in meaning between them.
當你搬出顯微鏡對準在人類認知上，你會看到很多微妙的差別存在于它們的意思里。
So, "give the X to the Y," that construction corresponds to the thought
所以“Give the X to the Y”--這個構式對應的想法是：
"cause X to go to Y." Whereas "give the Y the X" corresponds to the thought "cause Y to have X."
“Cause X to go to Y”，而“Give the Y the X”對應的想法是“cause Y to have X”。
