CLC Number: 

  • H042
[1] 大河内康宪.量词的个体化功能[J].汉语学习,1988(6):8-13.
[2] 储泽祥.名词及其相关结构研究[M].长沙:湖南人民出版社,2000.
[3] 方经民.汉语空间方位参照系统认知研究[D].上海:上海师范大学文学院,2002.
[4] 方绪军.现代汉语实词[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2000.
[5] 胡明扬.词类问题考察[M].北京:北京语言大学出版社,1996.
[6] 郭锐.现代汉语词类研究[M].北京:商务印书馆,2002.
[7] 李宇明.主观量的成因[J].汉语学习,1997(5):1-6.
[8] 刘学敏,邓崇谟.现代汉语名词量词搭配词典[M].杭州:浙江教育出版社,1989.
[9] 陆俭明.现代汉语中数量词的作用[M]//中国语文杂志社.语法研究和探索(四).北京:北京大学出版社,1988:172-186.
[10] 陆俭明.词的具体意义对句子意义理解的影响[J].汉语学习,2004(2):1-5.
[11] 彭睿.非量化名词的考察[M]//胡明扬.词类问题考察.北京:北京语言大学出版社,1996:105-107.
[12] 沈家煊.“有界”与“无界”[J].中国语文,1995(5):367-380.
[13] 沈家煊.转指和转喻[J].当代语言学,1999(1):3-15.
[14] 沈家煊.不对称和标记论[M].南昌:江西教育出版社,1999.
[15] 沈家煊.语言的“主观性”和“主观化”[J].外语教学与研究,2001(4):268-275.
[16] 邵敬敏.量词的语义分析及其与名词的双向选择[J].中国语文,1995(5):367-380.
[17] 王惠,朱学锋.现代汉语名词的子类划分及其定量研究[C]//陆俭明.1998现代汉语语法学国际学术会议论文集.济南:山东教育出版社,1998.
[18] 王珏.现代汉语名词研究[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.
[19] 温锁林.从词性标注看小句的中枢地位[J].汉语学报,2005(1):52-60.
[20] 温锁林,刘开瑛.汉语名、动、形兼类词的两种鉴别方法[J].语文研究,1998(1):29-33.
[21] 温锁林.汉语的性状义名词及相关问题[J].语言教学与研究,2010(1):44-51.
[22] 杨娜.汉语名词、量词匹配研究[D].桂林:广西师范大学文学院,2004.
[23] 俞士汶,等.现代汉语语法信息词典详解(第二版)[M].北京:清华大学出版社,2003.
[24] 袁毓林.词类范畴的家族相似性[J].中国社会科学,1995(1):154-170.
[25] 张文庭.现代汉语特殊名词的非量化研究[J].现代语文(下旬),2016(5):69-73.
[26] 中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室.现代汉语词典[M].北京:商务印书馆,2005.
[27] 周丽萍.现代汉语非量名词探微[J].暨南大学华文学院学报,2002(1):49-57.
[28] 朱德熙.语法讲义[M].北京:商务印书馆,1962.
[29] Langacker, Ronald W. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar(Vol. 1)[M]. Stanford:Stanford University Press,1987.
[30] Grinevald,Collette.A morphosyntactic typology of classifiers.In Gunter Senft(ed): Systems of Normal Classification[M].Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2000.
[1] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 81-88.
[2] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 103-108.
[3] FAN Zhong-yuan. The Typology Research of the Strength Degree and Semantic Generalization Level of the Cross-Class Combination of the Universal Classifiers [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2017, 53(4): 49-54.
[4] ZONG Shou-yun. Semantic Characteristic of “Dao” and Difference among “Dao”, “Tiao” and “Gen” [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2015, 51(2): 77-82.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 1(1): 1 .
[2] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 0, (): 1 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 1 -10 .
[4] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 11 -17 .
[5] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 18 -24 .
[6] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 25 -30 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 31 -36 .
[8] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 37 -41 .
[9] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 42 -47 .
[10] . [J]. Journal of Guangxi Teachers Education University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 54(3): 48 -54 .