Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/158988
|
| Title: | 比較三個英文結束片語 ‘Put an End to’、‘Bring an End to’ 和 ‘Come to an End’：以語料庫為本之研究
Comparisons of Three English Ending Phrases: ‘Put an End to’, ‘Bring an End to’ and ‘Come to an End’—A Corpus-based Study |
| Authors: | 陳昱晴
Chen, Yu-Ching |
| Contributors: | 鍾曉芳
Chung, Siaw-Fong
陳昱晴
Chen, Yu-Ching |
| Keywords: | 結束語義
搭配詞
語意韻
及物性
Semantics of Ending
Collocation
Semantic Prosody
Transitivity |
| Date: | 2025 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-09-01 14:37:44 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 「結束」是一個多數人在日常生活中皆會經歷的普遍概念。與「結束」相關的經驗可涉及多種領域，例如時間、生命、關係或事件等。此外，與「結束」相關的詞語在我們的日常語言中亦經常被提及與使用。除了字面上的意義外，這些詞彙也同時承載了重要的認知與情感價值，通常蘊含終結或轉變的意涵。以往與詞義相關之研究，多著重於比較具有相同及物性的詞彙；相較之下，針對及物性不同、且聚焦於「結束」概念相關片語的研究相對稀少。
本研究以語料庫為基礎，探討三個英語中表示「結束」概念的片語：put an end to、bring an end to 與 come to an end，旨在分析它們的詞語搭配（collocation）與語意韻（semantic prosody）之異同。研究者從當代美國英語語料庫（Corpus of Contemporary American English, COCA）中蒐集 247 個與上述片語搭配的名詞，並使用WordNet 將其歸類為18個語義類別，接著分析各片語與其搭配詞之評價語氣（正面、中性或負面）。
研究結果顯示，三個片語在搭配詞類型與語意傾向上呈現明顯差異。由於其高及物性，put an end to 與 bring an end to 多搭配與人類行為相關的詞彙，但 put an end to多被使用於較小規模的語境，而 bring an end to 則常出現在歷史、政治等較正式、宏觀的情境中，並展現三個片語中最高比例的負面語意韻。相較之下，come to an end 屬於較低及物性的片語，搭配詞涵蓋時間、生活經驗與自然過程，語意韻則以中性為主，顯示其語用彈性較大，能自然描述事件結束的歷程。本研究亦發現片語搭配詞的語法結構（如「形容詞＋名詞」）也呈現不同的語意韻結果。上述研究結果對第二語言教學具實質啟發，幫助學習者更精確地掌握片語語用及語意。
‘Ending’ is a universal concept that most people encounter in their daily lives. ‘Ending’ experience can span various domains such as time, life, relationships, and events. In addition, expressions associated with ‘ending’ are frequently mentioned and used in everyday language. Beyond their literal meanings, these lexical expressions also carry significant cognitive and emotional weight that implies closure or transformation. Previous studies on lexical meaning have primarily focused on comparisons of expressions with similar transitivity. In contrast, research on phrases related to the concept of ‘ending’ with different transitivity remains relatively scarce.
This corpus-based study investigates three English verb phrases that express the notion of ending: put an end to, bring an end to, and come to an end. It aims to analyze and compare their collocational patterns and semantic prosody. A total of 247 noun collocates were collected from the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA) and categorized into 18 semantic groups using WordNet. These collocates were then analyzed for their evaluative tone as positive, neutral, or negative.
The findings show notable differences in collocational patterns and semantic prosody across the three phrases. Due to their high transitivity, put an end to and bring an end to frequently collocate with terms related to human actions, though put an end to is used in smaller-scale contexts, while bring an end to typically appears in formal, political, or historical settings, and displays the highest rate of negative prosody. In contrast, come to an end, a less transitive phrase, co-occurs with a broader range of terms related to time, life experiences, and natural processes, and shows predominantly neutral prosody. The study also reveals that the syntactic structure of collocates (e.g., adjective + noun) influences prosodic outcomes. These findings offer valuable insights for second language teaching and help learners more accurately grasp the pragmatic use and meaning of phrases. |
| Reference: | Aaron, J. E. (2024). Quantifying transitivity: Uncovering relations of gender and power. Language Variation and Change, 36(2), 123-147.
Andersson, M., Kurfali, M., & Östling, R. (2020). A sentiment-annotated dataset of English causal connectives. In The 14th Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW), COLING 2020, Virtual Conference, 12 December, 2020 (pp. 24-33).
Baker, C. F., Fillmore, C. J., & Lowe, J. B. (1998). The berkeley framenet project. In COLING 1998 Volume 1: The 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
Begagić, M. (2013). Semantic preference and semantic prosody of the collocation make sense. Jezikoslovlje, 14(2-3), 403-416.
Boas, H. C., Ruppenhofer, J., & Baker, C. (2024). FrameNet at 25. International Journal of Lexicography, 37(3), 263-284.
Bui, T. L. (2021). The role of collocations in the English teaching and learning. International Journal of TESOL & Education, 1(2), 99-109.
Childers, Z. W. (2016). "Cause" and affect: evaluative and emotive parameters of meaning among the periphrastic causative verb in English (Doctoral dissertation).
Church, K., & Hanks, P. (1990). Word association norms, mutual information, and lexicography. Computational linguistics, 16(1), 22-29.
Cowie, A. P. (1994). Phraseology. The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 6, 3168-3171.
Davies, M. (2009). The 385+ million word Corpus of Contemporary American English (1990–2008+): Design, architecture, and linguistic insights. International journal of corpus linguistics, 14(2), 159-190.
Davies, M. (2010). The Corpus of Contemporary American English as the first reliable monitor corpus of English. Literary and linguistic computing, 25(4), 447-464.
Davies, M. (2013). Google Scholar and COCA-Academic: Two very different approaches to examining academic English. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 155-165.
Ellsworth, M., Baker, C. F., & Petruck, M. R. (2021, June). FrameNet and typology. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Computational Typology and Multilingual NLP (pp. 61-66).
Fellbaum, C. (Ed.). (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database. MIT press.
Fillmore, C. J. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm (pp. 111–137). Seoul, South Korea: Hanshin Publishing Co.
Firth, J. R. (1958). Papers in linguistics, 1934-1951. Oxford University Press.
Geeraerts, D. (2009). Theories of lexical semantics. OUP Oxford.
Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. (2021). Corpus linguistics in legal discourse. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law-Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 34(5), 1515-1540.
Granger, S. (1998). Prefabricated patterns in advanced EFL writing: Collocations and lexical phrases. Phraseology: Theory, analysis and applications, 145-160.
Granger, S., & Meunier, F. (Eds.). (2008). Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective. John Benjamins Publishing.
Gries, S. T. (2008). Phraseology and linguistic theory: A brief survey. Phraseology: An interdisciplinary perspective, 3-25.
Hardiman, D. P., & Nuraniwati, T. (2023). Semantic Preference and Semantic Prosody of the Collocations of Sustainable in NOW Corpus. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 29(1).
Hopper, P. J., & Thompson, S. A. (1980). Transitivity in grammar and discourse. language, 56(2), 251-299.
Hou, S. (2023). A Comparative Study of Synonyms Semantic Prosody of Effect, Impact and Influence Based on Corpus. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature & Translation, 6(11).
Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied linguistics, 19(1), 24-44.
Hsu, J. Y. (2010). The effects of collocation instruction on the reading comprehension and vocabulary learning of Taiwanese college English majors. Asian EFL journal, 12(1), 47-87.
Hunston, S. (2007). Semantic prosody revisited. International journal of corpus linguistics, 12(2), 249-268.
Lewis, M., Gough, C., Martínez, R., Powell, M., Marks, J., Woolard, G. C., & Ribisch, K. H. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice (Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 223-232). Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Lien, H. Y. (2003). The effects of collocation instruction on the reading comprehension of Taiwanese college students. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.
Lin, Y. Y., & Chung, S. F. (2016). A Corpus-Based Study on the Semantic Prosody of Challenge. Taiwan Journal of tesol, 13(2), 99-146.Llorach, A. (1999). Gramática de la lengua española.
Louw, B. (1993). Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer?—The diagnostic potential of semantic. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 157–175). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
McCarthy, M., & O'Keeffe, A. (2010). Historical perspective: What are corpora and how have they evolved?. The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics, 3-13.
McCrae, J. P., Rademaker, A., Rudnicka, E., & Bond, F. (2020, May). English WordNet 2020: Improving and extending a WordNet for English using an open-source methodology. In proceedings of the LREC 2020 workshop on multimodal WordNets (MMW2020) (pp. 14-19).
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A. (2011). Corpus linguistics: Method, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
Mel’čuk, I. (1998). Collocations and lexical functions. Phraseology. Theory, analysis, and applications, 23-53.
Miller, G. A. (1985). Wordnet: Dictionary Browser'in Information in Data. In Proceedings of the First Conference of the UW Centre fot the New Oxford Dictionary. Waterloo, Canada: University of Waterloo.
Miller, G. A., Beckwith, R., Fellbaum, C., Gross, D., & Miller, K. J. (1990). Introduction to WordNet: An on-line lexical database. International journal of lexicography, 3(4), 235-244.
Moon, R. (2010). What can a corpus tell us about lexis?. In The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 197-211). Routledge.Næss, Å. (2007). Prototypical transitivity.
Nafilaturif’ah, M. I. P., & Poluwa, M. I. (2021). Semantic prosody and preference of “healthy” and “unhealthy” collocations in covid-19 corpus. Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching, 5(2).
Narkprom, N. (2024). A corpus-based investigation into english synonymous verbs" restrict" and" constrain". LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 17(1), 688-714.
Ngo, V. M., Cao, T. H., & Le, T. (2018). Wordnet-based information retrieval using common hypernyms and combined features. arXiv preprint arXiv:1807.05574.
Nguyen, T. M. H., & Webb, S. (2017). Examining second language receptive knowledge of collocation and factors that affect learning. Language Teaching Research, 21(3), 298-320.
Noor, N. M. M., Ali, N. H., & Ibrahim, N. S. (2010). A new framework to extract WordNet lexicographer files for semi-formal notation: A preliminary study. In 2010 International Symposium on Information Technology (Vol. 2, pp. 1027-1031). IEEE.
Partington, A. (2004). " Utterly content in each other's company": Semantic prosody and semantic preference. International journal of corpus linguistics, 9(1), 131-156.
Partington, A., Taylor, C., & Duguid, A. (2013). Patterns and meanings in discourse: Theory and practice in corpus-assisted discourse studies (CADS). John Benjamins.
Peng, C. (2016). A corpus-based contrastive study of EFL synonymous phrases from the perspective of phraseology: A study based on CLEC and COCA corpora. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 38(4), 55.
Phoocharoensil, S. (2021a). Multiword Units and Synonymy: Interface between Collocations, Colligations, and Semantic Prosody. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 21(2).
Phoocharoensil, S. (2021b). Semantic prosody and collocation: A corpus study of the near-synonyms persist and persevere. Eurasian journal of applied linguistics, 7(1), 240-258.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman.
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors, 97-134.
Rica Peromingo, J. P. (2012). Corpus analysis and phraseology. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 6(1-3), 321-343.
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Schwarzer-Petruck, M., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J. (2016). FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. International Computer Science Institute.
Sarhad, J., & Mahmood, R. (2023). A corpus-based study of semantic prosody across a native corpus. Journal of Garmian University, 10(3), 902-909.
Schönefeld, D. (2013). Go mad–come true–run dry: Metaphorical motion, semantic preference (s) and deixis. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 1(1), 215-236.
Sinclair, J. (1987). Looking up: An account of the COBUILD project in lexical computing and the development of the Collins COBUILD English language dictionary.
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. (1996). The search for units of meaning. Textus, 9(1), 75-106.
Solijonova, M. B. r. q. (2023). Phraseology and phrases about family in use in english language. Educational Research in Universal Sciences, 2(17 SPECIAL), 414-418.
Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of language, 2(1), 23-55.
Sulaimanovich, M. A., & Lenara, I. (2021). Aspects Of Modern Phraseology. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(7), 1998-2000.
Svetla, K. (2021). Towards expanding WordNet with conceptual frames. In Proceedings of the 11th Global Wordnet Conference (pp. 182-191).
Weinert, R. (1995). The role of formulaic language in second language acquisition: A review. Applied linguistics, 16(2), 180-205.
Xiao, R., & McEnery, T. (2006). Collocation, semantic prosody, and near synonymy: A cross-linguistic perspective. Applied linguistics, 27(1), 103-129.
Zhang, L. (2023). Verbal semantics and transitivity. In F. T. Li (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 146–468). Brill. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學系
112551009 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0112551009 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [英國語文學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 100901.pdf | 4143Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
