賽夏語比較句結構

Comparative Constructions in Saisiyat

宋立心(Lihsin Sung)

指導教授 ： 宋麗梅

國立臺灣大學/文學院/語言學研究所/碩士(2008年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2008.03140

摘要

本論文主要探討賽夏語比較句結構，研究面向著重於句法結構和語言類型學，期能深入探究比較關係在賽夏語中是以何種面貌呈現。
誠如Kennedy (to appear)所言，「依據物件特性的量和程度的多寡作排序與比較是人類認知中的基本能力」。然而，長久以來比較句因為其句法、語意的複雜性，以及各語言表現比較關係的高度差異性，成了相當有趣的研究議題。
其中一項差異源自於比較述語的基本特性，也就是語言中的帶有層級性的詞彙。帶有此特性的詞彙，一般可歸類為所謂的形容詞。因此，本研究首先探討賽夏語形容詞在句法、構詞上的特徵。研究顯示，就句法而言，賽夏語形容詞具有高度的動詞特性，特別是有與靜態動詞相類似的句法、構詞表現。在形容詞的修飾功能方面，賽夏語形容詞必須加上一特定標記--’ima；而作為形容詞述語時，則不需與任何標記連用，因此更證明了賽夏語的高度動詞性。
接著我們採用Stassen (1985)的比較句類型學架構，深入分析賽夏語物件比較關係的句法結構。研究顯示，賽夏語比較句結構主要可區分為三類，分別是：並列型(第一類)、加接型(第二類)和超越型(第三類)。第一類結構利用兩個對比的句子或名詞來表現比較關係；第二類結構是在原本的單論元主事焦點句子中，添增一個比較基準名詞組，並以予格表示。此型比較句固定為主事焦點句型，無法有其它焦點變化。另由於賽夏語的予格具有多種功能，本結構難以自Stassen (1985)的架構下覓得適當類別。第三類結構因除了比較述語之外，尚存在一帶有「超越」意義動詞字根-Salaz，故稱為超越型比較句。此型比較句中的超越動詞可經焦點變化成主事焦點或指事焦點型。此比較句型屬連動結構，可歸類為Stassen (1985)架構中的「超越-1」類型。
賽夏語中，此三類比較句結構也可表現事件比較關係。事件比較中的兩個事件以嵌入句(embedded clauses)方式呈現，其中動詞保且有焦點記號。就事件比較而言，使用第二類比較結構時，母句述語為比較述語；使用第三類比較結構時，母句述語則為超越動詞。最後，在賽夏語中，並沒有構詞上的機制來表現等同句和最高級句型，前者利用連動結構表現等同關係；後者則需憑藉語境傳達。

關鍵字

賽夏語 ； 比較句結構 ； 語言類型學 ； 超越型比較句 ； 形容詞

並列摘要

The present thesis investigates the comparative constructions in Saisiyat with particular focus on their syntactic structures and typological characteristics so as to offer an in-depth exploration of how a comparative relationship is realized in Saisiyat.
Just as commented by Kennedy (to appear), “The ability to establish orderings among objects and make comparisons between them according to the amount or degree to which they possess some property is a basic component of human cognition.” However, the comparative construction has been a notorious yet intriguing research topic since languages demonstrate great variations in constructing a comparative structure.
One variation stems from the categorical status of the adjectives of which gradability is the essential feature for a comparative predicate. Therefore, we first characterize a group of lexemes that can constitute the comparative predicates in Saisiyat, the so-called putative adjectives. It is demonstrated that the Saisiyat adjectives are generally verb-like in terms of their syntactic behavior. Specifically, since they share similar morphosyntactic patterns with stative verbs despite certain distinctions concerning valency, it seems to be plausible to treat them as a subgroup of stative verbs. In regard to the modification devices in Saisiyat, the adjective modification of a noun is always concomitant with a marker ’ima while the adjective predication is unmarked. This fact reinforces the claim that Saisiyat adjectives are strongly verb-like.
We then conduct a syntactic analysis of entity comparisons in Saisiyat on the basis of Stassen’s (1985) typological framework. It is revealed that Saisiyat possesses three main comparative constructions, including the Juxtaposition construction (TYPE 1), the Addity construction (TYPE 2) and the Exceed Construction (TYPE 3). For TYPE 1, the comparative reading is inferred by juxtaposing two nominals or adversative clauses. TYPE 2, being mono-clausal in nature, gains the comparative sense via an addition of the dative-case marked standard NP to a typical one-argument AF construction. It is suggested that Stassen’s criteria are able to accommodate the Juxtaposition construction while a straightforward categorization for the Addity construction is still blurred due to the poly-functions pertaining to the dative case. The Exceed construction, is dubbed this name to characterize the existence of a bare verb root, -Salaz ‘exceed; surpass’ in addition to the kin-marked comparative predicate. While TYPE 2 allows no focus alternation, TYPE 3 has two focus alternations, namely the AF or the RF construction, which are hosted by the exceed-verb alone. The Exceed construction in Saisiyat is analyzed as an SVC and thus accords with the Exceed-1 comparative in terms of Stassen’s (1985) framework.
The three comparative devices also apply to event comparisons. The two events in a comparison are coded as embedded clauses as the action verbs are finite with the focus inflection. The matrix predicates in event comparisons are the comparative predicate in TYPE 2, and the exceed-verb in TYPE 3. Finally, we find no morphological device to mark equative and superlative constructions in Saisiyat. The former relationship is conveyed via SVC while the latter is conveyed via pragmatic inference.

並列關鍵字

Saisiyat ； comparative constructions ； typology ； adjectives

參考文獻

Sung, Li-May and Lihsin Sung. 2007. Comparative Constructions in Saisiyat.

Liu, Chen-Sheng Luther. 1996. A note on Chinese comparatives. Studies in the Linguistic Science 26.1:217-235.

Sung, Li-May and Cheng-chuen Kuo, 2008. A descriptive study of comparative constructions in Kavalan and Amis, Papers from the 16th Annual Meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 2006 (SEALS XVI), ed. by Paul Sidwell and Uri Tadmor, 109-119. Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University, Australia.

-----. 1999. Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: Some issues in Austronesian comparative linguistics. Selected papers from the eighth international conference on Austronesian linguistics, ed. by Elizabeth Zeitoun and Paul Jen-keui Li, 31-94. Taipei: Academia Sinica.

Zeitoun, Elizabeth and Chen-huei Wu. 2005. Saisiyat Reduplication Revisited. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 31.2: 31-56.