英语论文网

ammatical problem. Whether the grammatical studies, or the morphological studies of word, it should be based on the way of oral expression, i.e. based on the actual language. Fang Guangtao pointed out clearly and definitely that it is unreasonable to say that grammar depends on character. I.Nationality in English-Chinese contrastive study The philosophical basis of language of the theory of sinigram is the language-world-outlook, which was put forward by Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) ，founder of general linguistics. He held that language was indispensable for the shape of the world-outlook, because individuals had to clearly and definitely link his own thoughts with others’ thoughts and even the thoughts of the whole community, in order to form the thoughts to the world. Within a homogeneous nation, language is influenced by the same kind of subjectivity, so each language has its own specific world-outlook. A national language is a national spirit, and vice verse. ‘Different nation has different national spirit feature, which determines all kinds of differences existing in human languages.’ Pan Wenguo not only emphasized the importance of language-world-outlook to the Chinese study, but also definitely pointed out that the English-Chinese contrastive studies should be philosophically based on the language-world-outlook. He argued ‘the language-world-outlook is a revolution in contrastive studies and sees language as an ontology instead of merely a tool used for communication. Based on it, language studies are national and national culture oriented, rather than only the description of surface structure of language; Based on it, language studies should pay more attention to the studies of meaning, in order to lead to the studies of grammar and of pragmatics, and only in this way, language studies will be more practical.’ The crux of English-Chinese contrastive studies is to capture the distinctive features of these two languages, i.e. to emphasize the distinctive features of nationalities of languages. Early Chinese studies were influenced by the European language studies. ‘Word’ is the basic unit of European languages, while ‘Chinese character’ is the basic unit of Chinese. In order to achieve a satisfying result in Chinese studies, it would be better to be based on sinigram, taking advantages of studies of the Chinese traditional character, phonology, and critical interpretation of ancient texts, and also combing with the western linguistic theories. The alleged ‘influence of European language’ is that the studies of Chinese language is modeled according to the distinction of structural framework of ‘subject-predicate’ and its related noun, verb and adjective, so as to find the ‘corresponding’ components and then label them accordingly. In the English-Chinese studies, Chinese should be treated as the subject, while English the object. Only in this way could we avoid the alleged ‘influence of European language’ and stop labeling. A proper contrast may show the features clearly, while a simple correspondence may make a vague feature. For instance, we could not simply treat ‘们’in Chinese equal to or similar with ‘-s’ in English, merely because both of them have the grammatical functions of referring to the plural; we also could not simply neglect the sense and functions of world-building of‘们’, and even negate all the possible word-building in Chinese , merely because of the difference between ‘们’and ‘-s’. Actually, it’s a matter