漢語情態動詞語意研究: 由方言比較入手

Semantics of Modal Verbs in Chinese: a Dialectal Perspective

于嗣宜(Yu Szu-I)

指導教授 ： 連金發

國立清華大學/人文社會學院/語言學研究所/博士(2007年)

摘要

本篇論文主要探討漢語三個主要方言的情態動詞的語意, 此三個方言為普通話 (Mandarin Chinese), 閩南語 (Taiwanese Southern Min), 以及福州話 (Fuzhouese)。情態意義是指, 在可能世界 (possible worlds) 中, 對於平鋪直敘的描述加上主觀的或是行為的語意, 因此, 傳統上, 情態語意上有兩大區分：一為義務性意義 (Deontics), 一為認識性意義 (Epistemics)。其中能力意義(Capability)與Deontics和Epistemics的關係, 除了三者都與可能性 (Possibility) 和必然性 (Necessity) 語意有交錯關係, Capability另外有很不同的語意, 因此, 將Capability單獨區分為第三類情態語意, 更能清楚呈現情態詞不同的語言意義。

三個主要的Deontics情態語意被論及：責任 (Obligation), 許可 (Permission), 以及自由意願 (Volition)。Deontics表達的是施事者 (agent) 所行使的權利和所造成的影響, 換句話說, 是說話者對於某事件的認可或是堅持主張, 也包括了表達說話者或是主語的責任。在Epistemics方面, 推測 (Inference) 和價值 (Value) 是兩個主要語意, 都表示了對於某事件出現與否的可能性還有必要性。另外, 獨立成一類的Capability主要涉及說話者或是主語的能力 (Ability)。

大多數的情態動詞在不同語境中呈現不同的詮釋, 更會與Deontics, Epistemics和Capability三個情態語意分類互相影響而顯示不同語意, 詞彙和語意範疇並非一對一的絕對關係。本文以真實語言為基礎, 用以分析不同語境對每個情態動詞的作用, 以及型態和語意之間一對多的複雜關係。本文情態詞的肯定與否定形式是並重的, 對肯定與否定的對稱關係也加以討論。

討論語言的情態意義時, 除了放在動詞前的情態詞 (pre-verbal modal) 需要討論, 某些加在動詞後的情態詞 (post-verbal modal) 也值得思索, 這也是前人尚未觸及的部分。同樣的, 這部分也包含了肯定形式與否定形式對稱關係的分析。

本文的後半部處理普通話中動詞後的 “得(De2)”開始。經由不同形式的 “得結構”, 不同的情態意義才能完整被表達, 例如：[動詞 + 得 + 趨向補語], [動詞 +得 + 動詞], [動詞 + 得]等。

如同探討普通話動詞後情態詞一般, 閩東方言(閩南語和福州話)中相關的問題接著被提到。閩南語和福州話有個特殊的情態結構, 這結構相當於普通話的 “得結構”, 但是兩者之間卻有很大的差異。閩南語 “得(tit)結構和福州話 “得(li)結構”呈現特殊的型態意義。動詞 “會” 和 “得(tit/li) 像 “環綴 (circumfix)” 一般包住一個主要述語, 整個結合後的型態 [會 + 動詞 + 得(tit/li)] 表達潛在性和可能性 (potentiality) 的情態意義。並且, 在經過 “詞彙化 (lexicalization)” 的過程之後, [會 + 動詞 + 得(tit/li)] 形成一個整體, 擔任如同助動詞 (auxiliary) 的角色, 後面還可以接上其他述語, 整個結構的語意是許可 (Permission) 或潛在性 (Potentiality)。另外, 動詞 “會” 和 “得(tit/li) 的結合也能成為補語的標記, 跟在主要動詞後面, 指向補語。

雖然來自同樣一個語言, 除了詞彙和發音的不同, 方言之間呈現出許多的不一致。在類似的語言結構的發展上, 閩南語和福州話選擇的發展方向, 顯然與普通話不同。“得(De2)” 在某些普通話結構中背負著情態語意, 但是語言事實顯示, 閩南語和福州話中, 似乎沒有真正的動詞後情態詞 (post-verbal modal)。為了顯示情態意義, 閩南語和福州話必須運用動詞 “會” 或其否定形式 “袂” 放在主要述語前面, 述語後, 則繫上一個 “得(tit/li)”。即使整個結構詞彙化, 成了助動詞, 主要述語仍舊跟在其後。

情態詞不論是義務性語意還是認識性語意, 都可能表示可能性(Possibility)或是必然性(Necessity)的語意。否定詞也是語法和語意上有著特殊功能的成分, 在情態詞這兩大語意範疇中, 某些狀況下, 情態詞的肯定和否定形式的轉換, 可讓語意在可能性和必然性中切換。並且, 語言不同於邏輯, 語言有說話當時的情境的配合, 有說話者說話時的不同心情和態度, 因此語言的否定比邏輯上的否定在意義的詮釋上來得複雜, 往往多了一層語用意義(Pragmatics)。

關鍵字

情態動詞 ； 義務性 ； 認知性 ； 能力性 ； 動後成分 ； 可能性

並列摘要

The dissertation studies the Semantics of modal verbs in three Chinese dialects: Mandarin Chinese, Taiwanese Southern Min and Fuzhounese. Traditionally, it is said that there are two categories for modality: deontics and epistemics. However, since capability means quite differently from the other two categories, capability should be separated from deontics or epistemic, so that the semantic function of each modal verb would clearer.

In this dissertation, three deontic meanings are investigated: obligation, permission and volition. Deontics indicates an agent exercising authority; that is, speakers’ permission of or insistence on events and also the responsibility of speakers or subjects. In epistemics, two meanings are discussed: inference and value. Both of them express the possibility or necessity of the occurrence of events. Moreover, capability is concerned with abilities of speakers or subjects.

Mostly, modal verbs play roles in more than one category, and have different contextual meanings. The relationship between forms and meanings is not always one-to-one associated. In order to probe contextual meanings of each modal verb, and the relationship among forms and meanings (one-to-many), the study goes with the basis of authentic linguistic data of three dialects. The symmetrical phenomena between modal positive forms and their negative counterparts are also discussed. Both positive and negative forms are equally stressed.

On account of discussing modality in language, not only the pre-verbal modal words are worth a visit, but also some post-verbal modal words deserve to be mentioned. This is also an untouched part in former study. Similarly, the symmetrical phenomenon between positive and negative counterpart are also included.

The latter part of the dissertation deals with the post-verbal de (得) in Mandarin Chinese. Via different de-constructions, modal meanings are rendered. Among several de-constructions, modal-de is found in, such as [Verb + de + directional complement], [Verb + de + Verb] and [Verb + de].

To comply with the post-verbal modality issue in Mandarin Chinese, related issues in Chinese Min dialects, Taiwanese Southern Min and Fuzhounese, are associated, too. There are also special modal constructions in Taiwanese Southern Min and Fuzhounese. They are tit-construction in Taiwanese Southern Min and li-construction in Fuzhounese. These modal constructions show distinct morphological meanings from Mandarin Chinese. The verb e7/e53 (會, can) and tit8 / li24 are served as circumfix of verbs, and the output construction [e7/e53 + Verb + tit8/li24] indicates potentiality (possibility). In addition, after undergoing Lexicalization, [e7/e53 + Verb + tit8/li24] turns to be an integral, and it can be followed by other predicates. The constructional meaning is interpreted as either permission or potentiality. The combination of verb e7/e53 (會, can) and tit8/li24 can also be a complement marker, which tails after the main verb and directs to complements.

Though dialects are from the same language, other than lexical and pronunciation differences, in other areas they also show discrepancies. It seems that Taiwanese Southern Min and Fuzhounese face different directions from Mandarin Chinese in evolution of similar language constructions. De in some Mandarin Chinese constructions totes modal meanings. However, there is no real post-verbal modal word in the other two dialects. In order to show modal meanings, to attach the verb e7/e53 (會, can) or its negative counterpart be7/me53 (袂, cannot) in front of the main predicate and to attach tit8/li24 after the main predicate are a must in Taiwanese Southern Min and Fuzhounese. Even if the combination becomes a lexicalized auxiliary, the main predicate is still tailed.

Both deontics and epistemics can express modal meanings: possibility or necessity. Negatives are markers with unique functions semantically and grammatically. In some cases, the positive-negative switch of modal words can also switch the reading in between possibility and necessity. Moreover, language armed with contexts and speakers’ attitudes and emotions is different from Logic. Therefore, interpretations of Linguistic negation are more complicated, and mostly show extra pragmatic meanings.

並列關鍵字

Modal verbs ； Deontics ； Epistemics ； Capability ； Post-verbal markers ； Possibility

參考文獻

Cheng, Robert L. 1997. Taiwanese and Mandarin Structures and Their Developmental Trends in Taiwan III: Temporal and Spatial Relations, Questions and Negatives in Taiwanese and Mandarin. Taipei: Yuan-liou Publishers.

Bybee, Joan & Suzanne Fleischman. 1995. Modality in Grammar and Discourse: An Introductory Essay. In Modality in Grammar and Discourse: 1-14. Ed. by Joan Bybee & Suzanne Fleischman. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Lien, Chin-fa. (連金發) 1997. Aspects of the Evolution of tit (得) in Taiwanese Southern Min. In Sun, Chao-fen (ed.) Studies on the History of Chinese Syntax: 167-190. Journal of Chinese Linguistics Monograph Series 10: Project on Linguistic Analysis.

Tsao, Feng-Fu. (曹逢甫) 1990. Sentence and Clause Structure in Chinese: A Functional Perspective. Taipei: Student Book Co.

Anderson, Lloyd B. 1986. Evidentials, Paths of Change, and Mental Maps: Typologically Regular Asymmetries. In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology: 273-312. Ed. by Chafe, Wallace and Johanna Nichols. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Pubulishing Corp.