Chapter 1Introduction
1.1 The research background
英语名词的关注可以追溯到二十世纪早年。 Jesperson（1924）注意到并联表达式。例如，一只狗疯狂地吠叫并联的奋力狂吠的狗，我看到医生到来，英语论文题目，我看到医生的到来。他条款后者表达“NEXUS-实词”2对。后两个例子代表APHE英语，后来题为“物化”，这一现象应该指出的是，即使在英语名词已经大规模集成电路等科仪DEX，绝不是英语特有的属性。如果我们把一个跨语言的看看吧，我们发现它存在于所有的自然语言。这个名词探讨的广泛开展，不仅在主要语言，如中文和英文，但也轻微，甚至在许多少数民族语言的事实可以证明。这一事实表明名词是一种常见的一个普遍现象，在所有的自然语言。
The concerns with English nominalization can be traced back to the early yearsof the twentieth century. Jesperson (1924) noticed the paralleled expressions. Forexample, a dog barks furiously paralleled to a furiously barking dog, and I saw theDoctor arrives to I saw the arrival of the Doctor. He terms the latter ones of the twopairs of expressions as “nexus-substantives”. These latter two examples represent aphenomenon of English, which was later entitled as “nominalization”.It should be noted that, even though nominalization in English has been studiedextensively, it is by no means a property peculiar only to the English language. If wetake a cross-linguistic look at it, we find it existing in all natural languages. This canbe evidenced by the fact that the studies of nominalization are widely carried out notonly in the major languages such as English and Chinese, but also in many minor andeven minority languages. This fact shows nominalization is a common or a pervasivephenomenon in all natural languages.
The studies of English nominalization under the theory of the SystemicFunctional Grammar reveal that nominalization is a typical feature of scientificliterature or other formal registers such as legal language. This impression may be dueto the “abstraction” it invokes in our mind and the “objectivity” it creates in the text.But what essence about language can be found that accounts for the human ability tocreate the “abstraction” and “objectivity” through nominalzing actions, events orproperties which are supposed to be realized though verbs, sentence or adjectivesrespectively? Or what can be found about human cognition through the window oflanguage phenomena? A cognitive linguistic point of view of linguistic is thatlanguage is inseparable from human cognition and that natural language is both theresult of human mental activities and one of the component parts of human cognition(语言与认知是不可分的， 自然语言是人的只能活动的结果，又是人类认知的一个组成部分。) [赵艳芳，2017：7]. If nominalization is pervasive in natural languages, then it will be more than just a language phenomenon, but a shared mental activityand cognitive ability of human being, which deserves a cognitive linguistic concerninstead of only a description from a linguistic vision.Previously, in western and Chinese linguistic world, English nominalization hasbeen theoretically studied from a number of different linguistic orientations, inparticular, from transformational generative grammar (e.g. Lees, 1960; Chomsky,1970), the Systemic Functional linguistics (e.g. Halliday, 1994; Martin, 2017; Hu,1996), and cognitive-functional approach (e.g. Heyvaet, 2017; Zhang, 2017).The first line of research, represented by Chomsky, treats nominalization formsas surface structures derived from deep structures through the operation of thetransformation rules, so nominalization, like other structures, is the result of syntactictransformation.
The second line of research, initiated by Halliday (1994), approachesnominalization under the term of “grammatical metaphor”. For Hallidians, it is“metaphor” because the processes and properties ，英语论文 |
