評論
打印
So why should anyone care?
那為什么有人要在乎這工作呢？
Well, there are a number of interesting conclusions, I think,
這是因為有許多有趣的結論
from this and many similar kinds of analyses of hundreds of English verbs.
從這個例子，還有類似的對很多英語動詞的分析中可以得出。
First, there's a level of fine-grained conceptual structure,
首先，存在著一個精細的概念結構
which we automatically and unconsciously compute
我們自動、無意識地計算產生它
every time we produce or utter a sentence, that governs our use of language.
每當我們想到或者說出一個主導我們對語言的使用的句子
You can think of this as the language of thought, or "mentalese."
你可以把它理解成“思想的語言”，或者“思想語”。
It seems to be based on a fixed set of concepts,
它看上去是建立在一套固定的概念之上
which govern dozens of constructions and thousands of verbs --
這套概念管理著數十個構式和數千個動詞
not only in English, but in all other languages --
不僅僅是英文的，而是所有語言的
fundamental concepts such as space, time, causation and human intention,
最基本概念，比如空間、時間、因果以及人的意愿
such as, what is the means and what is the ends?
比如，什么是手段，什么是目的？
These are reminiscent of the kinds of categories
這些跟康德所主張的，
that Immanuel Kant argued are the basic framework for human thought,
構成人類思想的基本框架的那些范疇很相似
and it's interesting that our unconscious use of language seems to reflect these Kantian categories.
很有趣的是，我們對語言的無意識的使用好像在折射著這些康德主義的范疇
Doesn't care about perceptual qualities, such as color, texture, weight and speed,
不在乎感官的性質，比如顏色、材質、重量和速度
which virtually never differentiate the use of verbs in different constructions.
上述這些都幾乎從不區分動詞在不同構式中的用法。
An additional twist is that all of the constructions in English are used not only literally, but in a quasi-metaphorical way.
此外，英語中的所有構式不僅僅有字面意義，還有準隱喻的用法。
For example, this construction, the dative, is used not only to transfer things,
就拿與格來說，不僅用來轉移事物，
but also for the metaphorical transfer of ideas,
還用來比喻思想的轉移，
as when we say, "She told a story to me" or "told me a story,"
比如，"She told a story to me"或者"told me a story"
"Max taught Spanish to the students" or "taught the students Spanish."
"Max taught Spanish to the student"或者"taught the students Spanish."
It's exactly the same construction, but no muffins, no mice, nothing moving at all.
這都是完全一樣的構式，但里面沒有蛋糕或者老鼠，完全沒有運動。
