This paper makes a brief sketch of electronic corpus-aided grammatical research of Modern Chinese through two particular cases. First, Liu Yuehua’s description on the usage of directional complement ‘shàng (上)’, which shows the beginning of dynamic state, is introduced being verified by electronic corpuses. Next, the syntactic process which make the verb ‘kàn (看)’ acquire the syntax of adhesion verbs is clarified by recognizing in it two semantic features—‘search visual information’ and ‘store visual information’. Finally, this paper points out both the necessity and the limit of the electronic corpus-aided grammatical research.

Corpus linguistics has grown by leaps and bounds over the past several decades. Its impact on language study is undeniable. This paper attempts to provide a panoramic overview of corpus linguistics as it evolves in the context of Chinese in China and the US. I show with illustrations how corpus resources and tools can be deplored in studies on the Chinese lexicon and grammar and in applied linguistics, including language teaching. Key issues for future corpus building and exploitations are outlined, as are theoretical concerns.

人们在发现某个事物时，会使用各种各样的表现形式。本文重点考察说话人发现某事物时使用的“了”字结尾句与“有”字存在句，从语用学的角度考察二者的成立条件。以往的研究指出，当说话人能够判断出变化前的状态时，可以使用“了”字结尾句。本文通过探讨变化前状态的具体条件，总结出“了”字结尾句成立的三个条件：一，说话人直接见证事态的变化；二，说话人直接见证变化前的状态；三，说话人能够推断事情的具体内容。另外，关于“有”字存在句，本文认为其成立条件是：对于对象的存在，说话人不加任何主观解释，而只是客观地对其进行描述时，“有”字存在句成立。

“Ganghao” and “Qiahao” are grammaticalized from adverbs of “Gang/Qia” plus the adjective “Hao”. “Ganghao” was not used as an adjective in the past, while “Qiahao” has been used as an adjective. Both can only be used as adverbials alone, have the feature of prepositions, and can be used independently. In terms of their meanings, “Ganghao” describes the coincidence of an objective fact, while “Qiahao” emphasizses the speakers’ emotion with a complimentary sense. As compared to “Ganghao”, “Qiahao” mostly matches an accidental situation.

Wuhan dialect (Xi’nan Mandarin) employs the same marker “ba (把)” for both disposal and passive constructions, but their paths of grammaticalization are different. “Ba (把)” denoting disposal derives from the verb “ba (把)” meaning “to take”, which is used in serial verb construction. Passive marker “ba (把)” derives from the verb “ba (把)” meaning “ to give”, which is used in double-object construction, and then becomes a passive marker by causatives. The paper offers an analysis of why many Chinese dialects employ the same marker for their disposal and passive constructions.

在先行研究中有学者指出：现代汉语使役动词“让”的用法在明清时期有所扩大。但对扩大的过程，至今未见有论文对其进行详细的论述。本文以木村 2000 中提出的三种使役句―指示使役句·放任使役句·诱发使役句为基准进行调查，弄清了“让”首先从保留原义的动词发展成放任使役句的主要标记，然后又成为指示使役句和诱发使役句的标记。另外，还阐明了在使役动词“叫”替代使役动词“教”的过程中，“让”开始成为放任使役句的标记。

以往研究针对“吧”和「だろう」的认识确认功能提出了共有认识的概念。但这概念并无法说明两者之间的差异。本文从认知语言学前景和背景的概念出发，考察出“吧”和「だろう」的认知过程是：经由作为背景的发话情境，导出作为前景的共有认识。并把共有认识按照性质分为：关于现场体验的认识和关于潜在知识的认识，这两种分类也显示出认知过程的存在。最后，针对“吧”和「だろう」的差异，本文主张「だろう」只透过共有认识就能找出其参照的发话情境，因此发话情境有无用文字明确表示都不影响「だろう」的使用。然而“吧”则不同，因为“吧”的确认功能的认定是随着发话情境而定的，所以无法光靠共有认识找出参照的发话情境，必须用文字明确指出。