MULTIPLE-READING CHARACTERS: DIFFERENT LEXEMES OR HISTORICAL LAYERS?

The reading-meaning correspondences in poyin zi (破音字) have never been clear-cut in Middle Chinese as well as in Modern Pekinese. Results of surveys of actual pronunciations of 'poyin zi' and one-reading characters in Pekinese renders the term 'poyin zi' almost meaningless. This paper attempts to prove that the different pronunciations of such characters are historical layers in the process of sound change and are still subject to further sound change. The formation of particular 'poyin zi' has been entirely fortuitous, as revealed in cross-dialectal comparisons. A 'poyin zi' ought to be studied in its entirety rather than divided into separate 'lexemes', because such a division will obstruct our vision of the path of the sound change. Supporting this view, I argue that the 2nd and 3rd editions of Hanyu Fangyin Zihui are descriptive in nature and have encoded large numbers of deviations from the prescribed norms, which its first edition subscribed to. Deviations are commonplace today and must have been even more commonplace at any point in history in the absence of any broadcast norms. Qieyun (Guangyun) may very well have been descriptive like the latter editions of Zihui. To view Qieyun as a prescriptive dictionary necessarily entails a 'compromise~collective' interpretation.

關鍵字

Pekinese ； sound change ； phonology ； multiple-reading characters ； tones ； dialects

並列摘要

從中古音到現代北京音，破音字（多音多義字）的音義對應幾乎從來沒有清楚的分界。而字典裡的一讀字在實際語音裏卻往往有所分歧。本文證明破音字只是音變的歷史層次而且音變還會繼續進展。一個字在不同方言裏讀音的比較顯示破音字的產生的偶然性及暫時性。因此音變的研究應當把一個字中古的多音多義的發展一併檢視，如果以表面的語義差異來分割一個字，結果只能看到該字音變的一斑，看不到全豹。《漢語方音字彙》第二、三版是描述性的記錄；而第一版則顯然是官方的規範音。今日口語裡，聲調不穩定，中古音裡應當是更不穩定；因為沒有廣播與電視的示範。《廣韻》應當就如《字彙》第二、三版，是描述性的記錄。如果把《廣韻》看成是規範性質的，就只好找出‘綜合性質’一類的解釋來使這個系統合理化。

並列關鍵字