本课题研究的相关理论综述
反义词的定义
The Modern Chinese Dictionary (5th Edition) defines antonyms as "words with opposite meanings." Wan Yiling, in her textbook "Chinese Vocabulary Course for Teaching Chinese as a Foreign Language," describes antonyms as "a set of words with opposing meanings." She provides two examples to illustrate this concept.
1 他很大方，但他女朋友却很小气。
2 学汉字对日本、韩国同学来说不难，对欧美同学来说却很难。
Antonyms can effectively convey opposing meanings, as seen in the example of "generous" versus "stingy." Additionally, using negation can illustrate contrast, such as "difficult" versus "not difficult." Both examples exemplify the concept of antonymous expression.
她指出像例子 2 中的“难”与“不难”不是一对反义词。因为“不难”是用
Phrases that include "不" are not standalone words; although they convey opposing meanings, they do not qualify as antonyms.
构成反义词的条件
The concept of what constitutes an antonym varies widely, but it is not strictly limited to words with opposite meanings Many terms in language, such as "high" and "not high," "small" and "heavy," "wide" and "narrow," "flaw" and "perfection," as well as "birth" and "death," do not qualify as antonyms For example, "high" and "not high" are not considered antonyms because "not high" is not a standalone word Similarly, the other pairs listed also fail to meet the criteria for antonyms According to Wan Yiling's perspective, specific conditions must be met for words to be classified as antonyms.
1.1.2.1 反义词双方必须表示同类的事物或概念
Antonyms are words that express opposing meanings while belonging to the same overarching category They represent contrasting subcategories within a shared concept For instance, "male" and "female" are antonyms that both pertain to the broader concept of gender.
The overarching concept of "gender" encompasses two opposing sub-concepts, both of which signify gender itself; these include "far" and "near."
In language, terms like "near" indicate proximity, while "black" and "white" refer to colors Similarly, "big" and "small" describe size, and "heavy" and "light" pertain to weight However, "small" and "heavy" are not antonyms, as they describe different categories—size versus weight—rather than opposing qualities within the same context.
1.1.2.2 反义词双方音节数目必须相同
Antonyms must have the same number of syllables, which creates a demand for symmetry and uniformity in their forms This means that single-syllable words should pair with single-syllable words, double-syllable words with double-syllable words, and multi-syllable words with multi-syllable words For example, "white/black," "snow white/pitch black," and "not white/not black" adhere to this pattern In contrast, "wide" and "narrow" do not form a pair of antonyms, as "wide" is a single-syllable word while "narrow" is a double-syllable word, resulting in a mismatch in syllable count.
很多学者就反问：在这样的句子“明枪容易躲，暗箭最难防”中，我们应对
“难”和“容易”怎么看待呢？明明它们是一组“意义相反”的反义词，否定
The term "difficult" actually conveys the meaning of "not difficult," which aligns with the concept of "easy." Interestingly, the syllable count differs between these terms Similar pairs include "clean/dirty" and "smart/dumb."
The author believes that examples like this are rare Furthermore, Chinese culture places great emphasis on symmetry and balance in language Generally, the term "easy" is often paired with "difficult," while "hard" contrasts with "easy." The sentences provided consist of two clauses, each containing five syllables, which enhances their symmetrical quality This reflects the Chinese preference for uniformity and symmetry in speech.
In summary, the paired use of antonyms is often employed in writing to enhance meaning through comparison and contrast, achieving a rhetorical effect In Chinese, antonyms typically require the same number of characters, as evidenced by numerous antonym dictionaries Therefore, the author fully supports the notion that "the number of syllables in both antonyms must be the same."
1.1.2.3 反义词双方的词性必须相同
Words with different parts of speech often convey distinct concepts; nouns represent things, adjectives describe the state or quality of those things, and verbs express actions or behaviors Therefore, even when some words have opposing meanings, they cannot be classified as antonyms if they belong to different parts of speech For instance, the word "fool" (noun) illustrates this point.
"Smart" (adjective), "flaw" (noun), and "perfect" (adjective) are not true antonyms, despite having opposing meanings Only words with the same part of speech can form true antonyms Additionally, both sides of an antonym pair should maintain a consistent stylistic tone.
Antonyms should maintain consistency in stylistic color For instance, pairs like generous/stingy, life/death, birth/passing, purchase/sale, and buy/sell illustrate this principle.
The antonyms discussed share a consistent stylistic tone: "generous" and "stingy" are colloquial terms, while "magnanimous" and "miserly" are more formal Additionally, "birth" and "death" are commonly used words, whereas "nativity" and "demise" reflect a more literary language.
In written language, the terms "buy" and "sell" are commonly used, while "purchase" and "sale" are more formal Although "sell" and "purchase" are antonyms, the contrast between "sell" and "buy" is more pronounced in people's perception This distinction arises from their different stylistic connotations and usage contexts, with "sell" and "buy" frequently appearing together, unlike "purchase" and "sale." Common phrases include "fair trade," "immediate purchase and sale," "buying short and selling short," and "prosperous buying and selling," but the latter terms are rarely used in juxtaposition.
The terms "fair trade," "immediate purchase and sale," and "centralized purchasing and selling" illustrate the challenge of establishing clear oppositional meanings, as "buy" and "sell" do not possess typical antonyms This highlights the need for consistency in stylistic color between opposing terms.
反义词的不对称现象
One significant characteristic of antonyms is their symmetry; however, there is a substantial presence of asymmetry within antonyms in language I believe that the primary reason for this phenomenon of asymmetry in antonyms is rooted in various linguistic factors.
The complexity of antonyms arises from the existence of polysemous words and synonyms For instance, a single word can have multiple antonyms; "thin" not only contrasts with "fat," but can also be opposed to "obese." Additionally, while two words may be antonyms, their relationship may not always hold true Take "life" and "death" as an example; although they are typically considered opposites, "death" can also mean "to reach an extreme," complicating their antonymic relationship.
“热死了”、“难受死了”）时，“生”就不能与这个意义的“死”构成反义关 系。
Relative antonyms are characterized by the existence of intermediate states For instance, between "black" and "white," there are colors like "red," "yellow," and "blue." Similarly, between "big" and "small," there is the term "medium."
Between "opposition" and "support," there exists a middle ground of "abstention." In practical terms, stating "this is black" implies it is not white; however, saying "this is not black" does not necessarily mean it is white, as it could also be red, yellow, or blue Similarly, between "big" and "small," there is a middle state of "neither big nor small, just right." Therefore, logically, "not small" does not equate to "big." When dealing with antonyms, starting from a negative often fails to affirm the other party's position.
1.2．相关研究综述
标记理论
The study of vocabulary asymmetry is closely linked to markedness theory, which addresses the various asymmetrical phenomena within categories in language For instance, the concept of "number" exemplifies this markedness, highlighting how certain forms may be more complex or less common than their unmarked counterparts Understanding these relationships is crucial for comprehending the nuances of language structure and usage.
In English, the plural form of nouns is marked, while the singular form is unmarked, typically requiring the addition of "s" for pluralization For example, "book" refers to a single book, whereas "books" indicates two or more This asymmetrical phenomenon is explained by the Markedness Theory, which was initially developed by linguists N Trubetzkoy and R Jakobson in the 1930s, representing a significant contribution of the Prague School to linguistics.
In 2002, the markedness theory posits that within the world's languages, certain linguistic elements are more fundamental, natural, and common, referred to as unmarked elements, while other elements are considered marked.
的 。 ” 标 记的 概念 自 特鲁 别茨 柯依 （ Trubetzkoy ） 提出 以后 , 历 经 雅柯 布 森
Linguists such as Jakobson, Chomsky, and Lyons have developed and refined the theory of markedness, initially created to explain asymmetries in phonetics, which later expanded to encompass various aspects of language research, including vocabulary, semantics, and syntax For instance, the terms "up" and "down" illustrate this asymmetry: while we can say "go up to the door, hospital, or cinema," we cannot say "go down to the door, hospital, or cinema." This indicates that "up" is unmarked while "down" is marked, highlighting the fundamental reason behind the asymmetrical nature of category members To determine which members within a category are marked and which are unmarked, Shen Jiaxuan (1999) has synthesized six criteria based on traditional theories and the standards set by Greenberg and Croft for cross-linguistic comparisons.
The combination standard states that the number of morphemes used to form marked items within a grammatical category is greater than or at least equal to the number used for unmarked items.
Aggregation standards indicate that more members can be grouped into an unmarked category than into a marked category, or at the very least, the numbers are equal.
In syntax, unmarked elements can occur in a wider range of syntactic environments compared to marked elements, or at the very least, in an equally diverse set of contexts.
④ 频率标准：无标记项的使用频率比有标记项的高，至少也一样高。
In grammar, the meaning of unmarked items is generally broader than that of marked items, indicating that the significance of marked items is typically encompassed within the meaning of unmarked items.
The diachronic standard indicates that in a language, marked and unmarked items both possess indicators, with the markers for marked items emerging before those for unmarked items and disappearing later than the markers for unmarked items.
According to Shen Jiahxuan (1999), there is some disagreement regarding whether the standards should be prioritized, but generally, it is not difficult to distinguish between marked and unmarked items when considering these standards collectively In languages like Chinese, which lack morphological variation, distributional and frequency standards become particularly significant.
The development of markedness theory can be divided into four key stages: (1) Trubetzkoy established the concept of phonological marking; (2) Jakobson introduced distinctive feature marking for phonemes and expanded its application to morphological studies; (3) Chomsky and others significantly revised phonological marking, theoretically addressing the constraints of binary oppositions; and (4) contemporary linguistics, including descriptive linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, typology, and applied linguistics, along with fields like semiotics, anthropology, and literature, widely utilize markedness theory.
1.2.1.1 标记理论在各个层面的运用
The theory of marking is applicable across various linguistic levels, including phonetics, morphology, vocabulary, grammar, and syntax Additionally, it extends into research fields such as semantics, pragmatics, applied linguistics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and semiotics, yielding significant research outcomes in each area.
Marking theory is applied at the phonemic level, exemplified by minimal pairs such as "pin" and "bin," which differ in their initial sounds [p] and [b], allowing them to be recognized as distinct words Components that exhibit related markings are referred to as marked elements, while those that do not display such markings are known as unmarked elements.
In the realm of morphology, the application of markedness theory is referred to as formal marking, which arises from the morphological changes of words Formal marking can be categorized into several types: (1) singular and plural forms of nouns, where singular is typically unmarked and plural is marked, as seen in examples like tree/trees, box/boxes, and family/families (2) Related complementary words can also create marked and unmarked forms, such as prince/princess, actor/actress, and host/hostess, where the latter terms include the suffix -ess, making them marked, while the former are unmarked Markedness theory has extensive applications in vocabulary, as relative words often exhibit marked forms.
一 些 无 标 记 ; 一 些 用 得 宽 泛 , 而 另 一 些 则 狭 窄 。 例 如 ： 英 语 中 的 “ man ” 和
“women”，前者通常为无标记项，后者为有标记项。“Man”具有泛指性, 既可指
男性, 也可泛指包括女性在内的人类, “Man”是无标记的, 分布范围比较广。
The term "woman" specifically refers to females and is a marked term with a limited scope of distribution In contrast, "dog" serves as an unmarked term that encompasses all dogs, including both males and females, while "bitch" is a marked term that denotes a female dog.
认知理论
Cognitive linguistics is grounded in cognitive psychology, which provides the theoretical framework for understanding language At the core of cognitive psychology lies the concept of cognition, emphasizing how our mental processes influence language use and comprehension This relationship highlights the interplay between language and thought, showcasing the significance of cognitive mechanisms in shaping our linguistic abilities.
知 。 所 以 在 讨 论 认 知 语 言 学 之 前 我 们 必 要 简 要 探 讨 “ 认 知 ” 的 含 义 。 认 知
Cognition, derived from the Latin term "cognitio," refers to the processes of knowing and learning It is a fundamental aspect of psychological processes that correspond to emotions and will Cognitive linguistics is a field of study that examines language from a cognitive perspective, emphasizing the relationship between cognition and language It posits that language is a means of organizing experiential knowledge of the world Key themes in cognitive linguistics include the connection between language research and the process of concept formation, the establishment of word meanings in relation to encyclopedic knowledge and interpretations, the grounding of concept formation in universal bodily experiences—particularly spatial experiences that shape metaphorical constructions of the mental world, the categorization inherent in all aspects of language based on broad prototype theory, and the pursuit of unified explanations for linguistic phenomena rather than categorizing them into distinct levels such as phonetics, morphology, vocabulary, syntax, and pragmatics.
Cognitive linguistics encompasses three main branches: (1) Cognitive semantics, which includes word formation and semantic analysis, with John R Taylor as a prominent figure; (2) Cognitive grammar, which derives grammatical rules through the analysis of existing languages and their underlying environments, habits, and metaphors, rather than through mathematical generative equations This field has seen the emergence of construction grammar as a specialized discipline, with R W Langacker being a key representative, known for his works "Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites" and "Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Volume 2: Descriptive Application."
Cognitive linguistics was founded by key figures such as George Lakoff, Mark Johnson, and R.W Langacker Lakoff and Johnson focused on the study of metaphors in language and their connection to human cognition, while Langacker specialized in cognitive grammar.
In his 2007 work "Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics and the Emergence of Cognitive Linguistics," Xiao Renfei summarizes the significant developments in cognitive linguistics during the 1980s He highlights the influential book "Metaphors We Live By" by Lakoff and Johnson, which explores the essence of language through the lens of metaphor, demonstrating the close relationship between language and metaphorical cognitive structures The authors argue that metaphors serve as a fundamental way of thinking, introduce the "empirical semantic view," and explain that human metaphorical cognitive structures form the basis for the development of language and culture, while also influencing thoughts and cultural perspectives in a reciprocal manner.
The empirical view of language posits that our sensory organs and their environments significantly shape our thoughts and language Objective reality gains meaning only when perceived by the brain, and reasoning is influenced by physiological, cognitive, social, cultural, and experiential factors Human rationality is inherently imaginative and metaphorical, deeply connected to the human body In 1987, three influential works emerged, including Johnson's "The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason."
Cognitive linguistics emerged as a distinct field with foundational works such as Langacker's "Foundation of Cognitive Grammar" and Lakoff's "Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things." A significant milestone in its development occurred in the spring of 1989, when the first International Cognitive Linguistics Conference was organized by R Dirven in Duisburg, Germany Following this event, the journal "Cognitive Linguistics" was published in 1990, leading to the establishment of the International Cognitive Linguistics Association.
1.2.2.1 认知语言学在各个层面的运用
认知语言学在词汇教学上的应用：
In his 2002 article "Insights from Cognitive Linguistics for English Vocabulary Teaching," Liang Xiaobo emphasizes the significant benefits of integrating cognitive linguistics theories into vocabulary instruction He highlights the importance of focusing on basic vocabulary categories, as categorization is a central theme in cognitive linguistics Categories play a crucial role in how we perceive and classify the world around us; without them, our understanding of reality would be severely limited.
According to Glass and Holyoak (1986), categories such as plants, animals, cows, sheep, roses, and tables each represent distinct classifications Research by Berlin et al (1973) indicates that people categorize the kingdoms of flora and fauna into five hierarchical levels These levels include: a) Unique beginner, which encompasses broad categories like "plant" and "animal"; b) Life form, which includes specific types such as "tree," "bush," and "flower"; c) Generic name, with examples like "pine," "oak," "maple," and "elm"; d) Specific name, which refers to particular species such as "Ponderosa Pine," "White Pine," and "Jack Pine"; and e) Varietal name, which includes variations like "Northern Ponderosa" and "Western Ponderosa."
The different levels of categorization are mutually exclusive, with no overlap between them According to Berlin and colleagues, the third level, which consists of basic categories, contains approximately 500 such categories across languages This third level is more useful and widely used in everyday language compared to levels one and two Additionally, it is simpler, more stable, and easier to remember than levels four and five Berlin and others suggest that the words within this category are the tightest, likely due to the way people perceive these concepts.
Cognitive linguistics highlights the significance of basic category vocabulary in everyday language, which allows individuals to categorize similar characteristics in objects These basic category terms, due to their simplicity and compactness, play a crucial role in communication, although we may not always be aware of it Therefore, vocabulary teaching should prioritize basic category words, emphasizing the cognitive rationale behind word meanings rather than viewing them as arbitrary Research by Heine et al (1991) indicates that people often use simpler, concrete concepts to represent more complex, abstract ideas, reflecting a cognitive process that moves from self to the external world and from concrete to abstract This egocentric perspective illustrates how individuals perceive their environment When teaching body-related vocabulary, it is beneficial to explain the cognitive evolution of these terms to demystify their meanings Additionally, understanding the deep connections between polysemous words, such as the various meanings of "over," through prototype theory and cognitive mapping, reveals the intricate relationships between different meanings.
( 2) The bird flew over the yard
( 3) The plane flew over the hill
( 4) Hang the painting over the fireplace
( 5) The power line stretches over the yard
( 6) The board is over the hole
( 7) The city is clouded over
( 8) The guards were posted all over the hill
Cognitive linguistics identifies three primary meanings of the term "over": (1) "above" and "through" (examples 1, 2, 3); (2) "above" (examples 4, 5); and (3) "to cover" (examples 6, 7, 8) The first group represents the core meaning, serving as the prototype for the overall semantics of "over." Each group of meanings also extends the core meaning, reinforcing its role as a prototype Additionally, the study emphasizes the significance of metaphorical meanings, viewing metaphors as crucial phenomena in language Cognitive linguistics posits that metaphorical thinking is a creative cognitive ability that develops alongside human cognition, representing an advanced stage of cognitive development essential for understanding the world, particularly abstract concepts For a visual representation of these meanings, refer to Lakoff (1987: 419-427).
认知语言学在语法教学上的应用：
To effectively teach grammar concepts and their applications, educators must align their methods with students' cognitive processes, making abstract rules more tangible and comprehensible This approach aims to clarify complex grammatical phenomena, enabling students to easily grasp and retain these concepts According to Wu Xiaoming in "On the Application of Cognitive Linguistics in English Grammar Teaching," cognitive linguistics posits that various concepts form a network of knowledge, where higher-level concepts depend on the understanding of lower-level ones For instance, the concept of "joint" is understood through the reference of "finger," which in turn relates to "hand," and so forth This interdependence creates a hierarchy of concepts with varying degrees of complexity Therefore, teachers should guide students to trace back to foundational concepts, thereby making abstract grammatical ideas more concrete and relatable, such as when explaining "possessive adjectives" in the context of pronouns.
The terms "adjective possessive pronouns" and "noun possessive pronouns" refer to two important grammatical concepts Adjective possessive pronouns, such as "my," "your," "his," "her," "its," "their," and "our," function similarly to adjectives, while noun possessive pronouns, including "mine," "yours," "his," "hers," "its," "theirs," and "ours," function like nouns This distinction is made to clarify their roles in sentences; for example, in the phrase "his shirt," "his" acts as an adjective possessive pronoun modifying the noun "shirt."
In the context of cognitive linguistics, the term "his" functions as an adjectival possessive pronoun, as seen in the sentence "His brother is a driver." Conversely, "mine" serves as a nominal possessive pronoun, acting as the subject in the independent clause "mine is a doctor," which replaces "my brother." This illustrates the practical applications of cognitive linguistics, particularly in foreign language education, highlighting its significant role in language instruction.
1.2.2.2 反义词和认知理论
反义词的不对称研究
Early research on the asymmetry of antonyms includes Lu Jiawen's "Classification and Use of Monosyllabic Antonyms" (1981), Cui Yonghua's "Syntactic and Semantic Issues Related to Evaluative Adjectives" (1982), and Shi Anshi and Zhan Renfeng's "Commonalities, Categories, and Asymmetry of Antonyms" (1983) Lu Jiawen focused on the asymmetry in the word order of monosyllabic antonyms, suggesting that the preceding morpheme typically conveys a positive meaning Cui Yonghua discussed semantic and syntactic issues related to evaluative adjectives, while Shi Anshi and Zhan Renfeng described the asymmetrical phenomenon between affirmative and negative forms of adjectives, noting that some negative forms lack corresponding affirmative counterparts, and that even when both exist, their meanings may have shifted Although these early lexical studies recognized various asymmetries in antonyms, they primarily relied on examples and lacked systematic theoretical guidance, comprehensive descriptions, and an exploration of the deeper causes behind these asymmetrical phenomena.
Research on the asymmetry of specific vocabulary has been extensive since the 1990s, particularly influenced by markedness theory Studies on antonyms have evolved beyond mere definitions to incorporate advanced modern semantic markedness theories, focusing on the asymmetrical characteristics of Chinese antonyms Notable contributions include those by Shen Jiaxuan (1999) and Shi Yuzhi (2001), who categorized adjectives into different types based on their markedness Shen categorized adjectives into "size," "quality," and "temperature" classes, emphasizing the degree of marked opposition, while Shi's classifications included "cleanliness," "size," and "temperature," based on the quantitative characteristics of adjectives Despite minor differences, both perspectives offer valuable insights into the marked phenomena of adjectives, with Shen attributing the formation of marked patterns to cognitive and evaluative tendencies towards "convention," and Shi linking it to the quantitative features of adjectives.
目前对具体词的不对称的研究主要有：徐丹的《浅谈这 / 那的不对称性》
（1988）；马庆株的《“V 来/去”与现代汉语动词的主观范畴》（1997）；张华的
The cognitive examination of verb combinations "up" and "down" was conducted in 2002, while in 2003, Duan Mengmeng explored the pairing and asymmetrical phenomena of the antonymous word group "good - bad." Additionally, a study on the modern Chinese directional words "front, back, up, and down" was also undertaken.
Trong bài viết này, chúng tôi sẽ thảo luận về các nghiên cứu nổi bật liên quan đến sự không đối xứng trong ngôn ngữ học, bao gồm tác phẩm của Đinh Chí Tùng về "khái niệm mở/đóng và NP" (2006), nghiên cứu của Trần Yến Hoa về sự không đối xứng giữa các từ trái nghĩa "đại" và "tiểu" trong từ vựng tiếng Trung và ngôn ngữ trung gian (2007), cũng như công trình của Tô Hội về sự đối xứng và không đối xứng của nghĩa hướng trong các từ "đến" và "đi" (2007) Cuối cùng, bài viết cũng đề cập đến nghiên cứu của Đường Thu Yến về từ chỉ phương hướng "trên".
The analysis of symmetry and asymmetry in the concept of "down" was explored in a 2007 study, while Feng Zhifeng's 2008 research examined the diachronic and synchronic aspects of the antonyms "early" and "late." Additionally, Wu Wenjie and Xu Yan discussed the asymmetric distribution of "right" and "wrong" in their work.
以往对“多”和“少”的研究综述
The terms "more" and "less" are commonly recognized antonyms, and their study has a rich historical background Research on the asymmetrical phenomena associated with these terms in the Chinese language is extensive and diverse For instance, notable works include Lu Jianming's "‘More’ and ‘Less’ as Modifiers" (1985) and Zhan Renfeng's studies, which highlight the complexity and variety of these concepts in linguistic research.
“少”的对立和不均衡性》（1985）、施一昕的《“多”和“少”的不对应性》
（1988）、裘榮棠的《“多”和“少”语法功能上的差异性》（1999）、赵聪的
The examination of the asymmetrical use of "more/less" as adverbials is discussed in Wang Jianzhen's 2006 study, while the grammatical symmetry and asymmetry of "more/less" is analyzed in her 2007 work Additionally, Zhang Qiaoli addresses the imbalance in the usage of "more" and "less."
（2010） 等。另外，有关“很+多/少”的研究也十分丰富。
In his 1985 article "Using 'More' and 'Less' as Modifiers," Lu Jianming analyzes the symmetrical and asymmetrical phenomena of "more" and "less" as modifiers This work serves as a supplement to Lü Shuxiang's essay on "more, less, many, and few." Lu Jianming provides a detailed examination of the use of "more" and "less" in four specific aspects: 1 When "more/less" functions independently as a modifier; 2 When "more/less" is used with the particle "的" as a modifier; 3 [Additional points would follow in a complete rewrite].
Cụm từ "không nhiều/ít" và "rất nhiều/ít" có thể được sử dụng làm bổ ngữ Qua bốn khía cạnh này, tác giả chỉ ra rằng: (a) sự đối lập giữa động từ "nhiều/ít" và tính từ "nhiều/ít"; (b) sự đối lập giữa tính từ "nhiều/ít" và các tính từ thông thường khác.
In his 1985 work "The Opposition and Imbalance of 'More' and 'Less'," Zhan Renfeng analyzes the symmetrical and asymmetrical phenomena of "more" and "less" from the perspectives of adverbial and complement usage He points out that both terms can serve as adverbs and complements, creating a clear opposition; however, in many contexts, "more" is used exclusively, highlighting a significant imbalance where "more" holds a dominant position Zhan also provides several explanations for this imbalance from a semantic selection viewpoint, outlining principles that govern their usage.
The principles of coherence, positivity, and narrative or descriptive style play a significant role in effective communication These principles are widely applicable and contribute to the clarity and engagement of the content.
施一昕（1988）的《“多”和“少”的不对应性》，从三个方面对“多”和
“少”进行比较说明。
裘榮棠（1999）的《“多”和“少”语法功能上的差异性》只是简单的列举了
The article discusses various asymmetrical situations involving "more" and "less," but it does not categorize these scenarios or provide a thorough systematic analysis.
Bài viết của Zhao Cong (2006) mang tiêu đề "Khảo sát hiện tượng không đối xứng của 'nhiều/ít' làm trạng ngữ" được hướng dẫn bởi lý thuyết ngữ pháp nhận thức và phương pháp "ba mặt phẳng" Nghiên cứu này khám phá các hiện tượng đối xứng và không đối xứng trong cấu trúc "nhiều/ít + VP/AP", mô tả quy luật của sự không đối xứng này và đưa ra những giải thích sâu sắc hơn.
Wang Jianzhen (2007) examines the symmetrical and asymmetrical distribution of "more" and "less" from both lexical and syntactical perspectives in his work "The Grammatical Symmetry and Asymmetry of 'More/Less'." Utilizing a novel tagging theory, he provides a detailed description of their distribution and attempts to offer insights from semantic, pragmatic, and cognitive viewpoints.
Trong bài viết "Phân tích ngữ nghĩa cấu trúc 'đa/thiểu + N'" của Chen Jinzong (2007), tác giả đã chỉ ra rằng ngữ nghĩa tổng thể của cấu trúc "đa/thiểu + N" mang ý nghĩa màu sắc bổ sung và đặc điểm hình thức Cấu trúc này không chỉ đơn thuần thể hiện số lượng mà còn gợi lên những sắc thái ngữ nghĩa phong phú.
“多/少”具有静态描述性与不可控性、动态变化性与可控性、量性特征。
In her 2010 work, "The Imbalance of 'More' and 'Less' in Usage," Zhang Qiaoli analyzes the imbalance of "more" and "less" from both grammatical and semantic perspectives She explores the reasons behind this imbalance, highlighting not only the differences in word classes but also the intersection of binary and multi-valued tendencies within their semantic fields The opposition between "more" and "less" exemplifies the conflict inherent in binary tendencies.
The concept of "many" stands in contrast not only to "few" but also to "none," as seen in pairs like "affectionate/unaffectionate" and "thoughtful/thoughtless." This creates a nuanced opposition where "many" embodies a multi-valued tendency When the binary oppositions of "many/few" intersect with the multi-valued tendencies, it leads to an imbalance in their usage.
“多”和“少”经常受副词“很、不”修饰分别构成“很多”和“很少”，
The terms "not much" and "not many" highlight the nuances in usage between "very much/a lot" and "not much/not many," prompting a deeper examination of their applications Consequently, there is a wealth of related articles exploring these distinctions.
岳中奇（2005）在《“很多”和“很少”句法意义与功能》中指出“很多”和
The terms "很多" (a lot) and "很少" (very few) can function as predicates and complements, yet they exhibit a clear contrasting distribution in syntactic positions such as modifiers and adverbials "很多" indicates a larger quantity, while "很少" signifies a smaller one, both serving as vague approximations that describe amounts exceeding or falling short of a preset standard However, the relationship between these quantities is asymmetrical; "很多" can be used as long as the amount slightly exceeds the standard, whereas "很少" applies only when the amount significantly falls below it This asymmetry suggests that "很多" has a broader meaning than "很少." Additionally, this phenomenon is influenced by the categories of "incomplete affirmation" and "incomplete negation" inherent in their syntactic structures Scholars like Shen Jiaxuan (1999) and Yue Zhongqi (2005) argue that "很多" represents a lexical meaning that surpasses the speaker's expected quantity, generating an "incomplete affirmation," while "很少" conveys a meaning far below the expected standard, resulting in "incomplete negation." Thus, "很多" can be seen as an unmarked term indicating affirmation, while "很少" is a marked term indicating negation.
In her 2008 article, "An Analysis of the Asymmetry between 'Many' and 'Few'," Dang Jingpeng employs marking theory to establish a correlation between the "many" and "few" series, as well as the categories of "numeral + measure word" and "numeral + verb phrase." This correlation elucidates the asymmetrical phenomenon of "very many" versus "very few." She notes that "not many" and "not few" also exhibit asymmetry, with "not few" being more frequently used than "not many." While "not many" indicates a quantity below a preset standard, "not few" signifies a quantity equal to or exceeding that standard, thus carrying a broader meaning Furthermore, "not few" appears in more syntactic environments compared to "not many." Although both can function as predicates and complements to verbs, "not few" can also serve as a complement to adjectives, whereas "not many" cannot.