現代漢語把字句與泰語相應句式的對比分析─兼談泰籍學生的華語教學應用

A Contrastive Analysis of the BA Construction in Chinese and Its Counterparts in Thai with Pedagogical Applications for Thai Learners of Chinese

許秀珠(SIRIKAMOL SIRISUMPAN)

指導教授 ： 陳俊光博士

國立臺灣師範大學/國際與僑教學院/華語文教學研究所/碩士(2006年)

摘要

根據沈家? (2002) 對現代漢語“把”字句界定的語義理論，漢語“把”字句以“說話者觀點上的處置義”為核心語義，其所表達的處置義包括“空間位移”、“時間位移”、“信息傳遞”與“狀態變化”等四種處置結果。而“把”字的整個句式語義指“說話者認定主語對賓語做了什麼，使得賓語有所位移或變化”。依照語義與語法特徵的不同，可將“把”分成「處置式」與「致使式」等兩種類型。兩者的區分在於：前者同時具備“說話者觀點上的處置義”與“主語觀點上的處置義”，而後者僅具有“說話者觀點上的處置義”。
現代泰語與漢語介詞“把”對應的詞語分別是動詞“aw”與“thamhai”。雖然以上漢、泰對應詞的詞性不同，前者為介詞，後者為動詞，不過本論文根據現代語言對比分析理論，著重符合人類語言認知的語義功能，而不侷限在形式或語法上的對等，因此便能對漢、泰這兩類詞語(“把”vs.“aw”/“thamhai”)進行功能性的對比。本論文研究結果顯示，泰語對應於漢語“把”字句之「處置式」與「致使式」的語詞分別如下：第一、泰語“aw1”的功能對等於“把”字句「處置式」中的“空間位移”與“信息傳遞”。第二、“aw2”的功能對等於“把”字句「致使式」中的“心理空間定位”。第三、含有他動的位移或變化之義的“thamhai 1”或“thamhai 2”，其功能對等於“把”字句「致使式」中的“空間位移”、“時間位移”、“信息傳遞”與“狀態變化”。
論文最後將對比的結果，按照鄧守信 (2004) 提出的對外漢語語法點困難度排序原則，將對泰籍學習者漢語“把”字句的教學排序，依次分為四個階段：(一)“把”字句「處置式」中的“空間位移”與“信息傳遞”→ (二)“把”字句「處置式」中的“時間位移”與“狀態變化”→ (三)“把”字句「致使式」中的“心理空間定位”→ (四)“把”字句「致使式」中的“空間位移”、“時間位移”、“信息傳遞”與“狀態變化”。

關鍵字

現代漢語“把”字句 ； 漢泰對比 ； 功能性對等 ； 教學排序

並列摘要

According to Shen’s (2002) theory regarding the semantics of the BA Construction in Chinese (Chinese BA hereafter), the core meaning of Chinese BA can be understood as “speaker-oriented disposal”. The concept of disposal can be applied to spatial movement, time movement, information transmission and change of state. Additionally, the construction meaning of Chinese BA is as follows: From the speaker’s viewpoint, the subject has exerted some influence on the object, resulting in the object being moved or changed. Moreover, based on semantic and syntactic distinction, Chinese BA can be further divided into two subcategories—Disposal and Causativeness. Disposal BA includes both “speaker-oriented disposal” and “subject-oriented disposal”, whereas Causative BA refers only to “speaker-oriented disposal”.
In this thesis, Thai verbs AW and THAMHAI are used as the basis of contrast with reference to the Chinese preposition BA. Although Chinese BA and Thai AW/THAMHAI belong to different word classes, a useful contrastive analysis between the two can still be conducted, as long as the approach of functional equivalence is adopted. Thus, based on semantic equivalence, AW and THAMHAI in Thai can be compared with Disposal BA and Causative BA in Chinese in the following manners: (1) The AW1 is equivalent to the “spatial movement” and “information transmission” meaning of Disposal BA, (2) The AW2 is equivalent to the “mental movement” meaning of Causative BA, and (3) The THAMHAI 1 and THAMHAI 2 which carries the meaning of movement or change of state, is equivalent to the “spatial movement”, “time movement”, “information transmission” and “change of state” meaning of Causative BA.
Finally, to provide pedagogical implications of Chinese BA for Thai learners, the present author attempts to situate the results of the current contrastive analysis in this thesis within the framework of Pedagogical Grammar proposed by Teng’s (2004). The pedagogical sequencing is suggested below: (1) Disposal BA in spatial movement and information transmission, (2) Disposal BA in time movement and change of state, (3) Causative BA in mental movement, and (4) Causative BA in spatial movement, time movement, information transmission and change of state.

並列關鍵字

Modern Chinese BA Constructions ； Chinese-Thai Contrast ； Functional Equivalence ； Pedagogical Sequencing

參考文獻

陳立元 (2005)。《漢語把字句教學語法》。台北市：國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文。

Chen, Fred Jyun-gwang﹝陳俊光﹞ (2006). Contrastive Research & Crosslinguistic Influence. Taipei: Crane Publishing Co.,Ltd.

Dowty, David (1991). Thematic Proto-roles and Argument Selection. Language，67，547-619。

Lan, Chun. (2003). A Cognitive Approach to Spatial Metaphors in English and Chinese. Beijing: 外語教學與研究出版社

Li, Charles N., & Thompson, Sandra A. (2003). Mandarin Chinese. Taipei City: The Crane Publishing Co., Ltd.