俺的论文

一． Introduction

The measurement of the adjectives in the language semantics field has been thought to be scales for a number of years. It is found that some adjectives such as dry-wet, safe-dangerous, naked-dressed, closed-opened are sensitive to the scales of semantics. These kinds of adjectives are correspondent to the subcollections of the scales which represent the properties or the degrees of these adjectives. This theory brought with the meanings of the comparative(e.g. larger than) as well as the methods of measuring things in such ways as five inches high. Therefore, it is clear that such a structure of a scale is responsible to change the semantics of adjectives.

In the paper, we focus on the total and partial properties of the adjectives which is mainly modified by the adverbs such as slightly, nearly, completely, almost, and very. These adverbs explain different meanings of the sentences which we are always confused and difficult to define. It is found that the semantic meanings of these modifiers are conformed to the previous theories of Cruse’s (1980) and Yoon’s (1996), which are typology of total and partial adjectives. For instances, the adjectives pairs of smooth-rough, closed-open, healthy-sick, dry-wet. In these pairs, the adjective smooth represents a lack of roughness, the adjective closed represents a lack of openness, the adjective healthy represents a lack of illness, and the adjective dry represents a lack of

wetness. On the contrary, the adjectives rough, open, sick, wet express they have such properties in some degree, which is sensitive to the scales of these degrees of measuring properties. To make sure whether it is acceptable in some expression patterns and the rationality of some collocations, such as almost wet/almost dry, slightly wet/slightly dry; almost closed/almost open, slightly closed/slightly open, and we will analyze the reasons related to the semantics and provide a comprehensive understanding towards the total and partial adjectives. Basically, total and partial adjectives differentiate from each other resulting from possessing different scale structures. And we assume that the standard value of total adjectives belong to the lower bound of the scale while the partial adjectives are free to anywhere in the partial adjective scale. For example, the property of the adjective dry displays the zero degree of wetness in the scale of the adjective wet. While, as for the adjective wet, it can be anywhere on the wet scale to illustrate its standard value. We concentrate on the theories which back up these phenomena and we also display the relations between these adjectives and their modifiers, such as almost, slightly, completely and so forth, that is, why these adverbs can modif ier some of the adjective but it can be meaningless when modifying others. At the same time, we illustrate some Chinese adjectives to compare the similarities and differences between Chinese and English total and partial adjectives. In addition, there are some other associated factors such as

comparatives and exceptive structures that are discussed in the paper to show the influence they put on the total and partial adjectives in the whole.

At the same time, we illustrate some Chinese adjectives to compare the similarities and differences between Chinese and English total and partial adjectives.

二．Literature review

2.1 Cruse’s Typology of Complementary Adjectives

Adjectives such as heavy-light, closed-open, big-small and fast-slow are antonyms. One of their important features is that their denotations are not jointed with each other. There is a formula showing this property.

(1) For every X: if X is A1 then X is not A2.

① If the door is closed then the door is not open.√

② If the towel is dry then the towel is not wet.√

③

④ √

Thus, we can know that the antonyms are comply to the implication. However, Cruse (1980) divided the antonyms into two categories：complementary and non-complementary. Complementary adjectives are adjectives that cannot exist in one entity at the same time and is against each other in their field. For instance, perfect and imperfect are known to be complementary adjectives because they are sensitive to the following

formula:

(2) For every X: X is A1 if and only if X is not A2.

① The painting is perfect if only if the painting is not imperfect. √ ② The table is clear if only if the table is not dirty.√

③ 这幅画是不完美的，当且仅当它不是完美的。√

④ 这桌子是干净的，当且仅当它不是脏的。√

However, for some antonyms such as heavy and light, they cannot back up the implication. Because the sentence is not acceptable if we put it as:

⑤ The box is heavy if and only if the box is not light.×

⑥ The ruler is short if and only if the ruler is not long.×

⑦ 当且仅当水不是热的，那么它一定是冷的。×

⑧ 当且仅当这条湖不是深的，那么它一定是浅的。×

Obviously, these sentences do not make any sense. Because the ruler which is not long do not necessarily mean the ruler is short, its property varies according different measurements. So these adjectives are called non-complementary adjectives. We can illustrate these features as follow:

Non-complementary

Complementary

The non-complementary antonyms’

standard value is decided by the

middle points mid 1 and mid 2 and the scale is not closed in either end. While the complementary scale has two closed ends in which the standard value of the adjective clean is at one side of the scale and that of dirty can be anywhere in the rest of the scale.

So, we can find the regular pattern of the complementary and non-complementary adjectives:

Table 1

However, we find that some structure can be acceptable, such as completely clean, slightly clean, if clean is located in the one point of the scale, then where the completely clean and slightly clean should be