現代漢語比字句與韓語相對應形式之語義和篇章對比分析

本研究以現代漢語比字句的語義分析、篇章分析及韓漢比字句對比分析為三大研究問題進行語言現象分析，並依研究結果進行教學設計。本論文透過文獻回顧和中央平衡語料庫，以及自建的漢韓平行小說語料庫共870筆語料進行探討。從語義層面上來看，現代漢語介詞「比」的功能是用來比較兩個事物性質或狀態的程度差異，含有比較前項（X）、比較點（P）、比較標記、比較後項（Y）、比較結果（R）等五個成分，基本結構是「X（P）比Y R」。比字句的謂語項有語義上的限制，必須是可程度比較的動詞，如狀態動詞中的形容詞及心理動詞或是有數量增減義的動詞其他一般動詞，不能直接進入比字句中，需有其他表程度差異的語法成分，如描述補語、狀語或能願動詞。篇章層面上，從省略和移位兩個面向討論比字句句式。省略分為比較前項省略及比較點省略，比較前項省略為信息省，比較點後項省略為認知省，省略動因乃是語言經濟原則中的省力原則。移位也可分為比較點移位和比字介詞組（比Y）移位，未移位時句子為自然焦點，移位後可帶來對比焦點。接著從漢韓對比語料庫發現，漢語「比」的韓語對應形式以「보다（boda）」為主，「보다（boda）」是比較格助詞，黏著在比較後項的後方，基本結構為「X 이/가（主格助詞）+ Y보다（boda）+R」。其次，韓漢比字句中皆有狀語和補語增補意義，但是漢語狀語只能是相對程度副詞（更/還），不能使用絕對程度副詞（很/非常），但韓語則無此限制。再者，漢韓補語的語序不同，漢語的程度/數量補語位在謂語後方，而韓語則是位於謂語前面。在篇章分析上，漢韓語同有零代詞的回指方式，且漢語比字句使用移位帶出對比焦點，韓語則使用對照格助詞引出對比焦點。最後筆者根據比字句句式的困難與否和跨語言距離排出教學語序，並分析現行的華語教材後，將對比結果應用到教學中，希望能針對韓籍學生提供有效的建議。

關鍵字

比字句；語言類型學；比字句的省略；比字句的移位；篇章分析；信息結構；漢韓對比分析；韓語格助詞보다（boda）

並列摘要

The current thesis has conducted semantic analysis and discourse analysis to examine the meaning and function of the Chinese preposition bi. Additionally, the contrastive analysis method was employed to compare the comparative marker bi with the word boda in Korean. Finally, the results of this study are applied for pedagogical purposes. This research has utilized relevant literature and empirical data for investigation purposes. The empirical data comprise 870 data points from the Sinica Corpus and Chinese-Korean translated corpus. At the semantic level, bi is a preposition that compares the differences in the properties and states of two things. The basic bi sentence contains five components: a comparative subject (X), comparative point, comparative marker, comparative standard (Y), and comparative result (R). The structure of a bi sentence is “X+bi+Y+R”. It is found that the predicate (verb) of a bi sentence has restrictions due to semantic demands; that is, the verbs must be state verbs or active verbs with increasing or decreasing meanings. The other types of verbs cannot be directly used in bi sentences, and some grammatical elements, such as descriptive complements, adverbials, or modal verbs, are required. Secondly, at the discourse level, it is found that there are two kinds of ellipsis in bi sentences: a comparative subject ellipsis and comparative point ellipsis. A comparative subject ellipsis is used to indicate given information, and such an ellipsis can be seen as a cognitive omission. The purpose of an ellipsis is due to the “economy principle” of language for the purposes of conveying more information with less effort. Next, there are also two kinds of movement in bi sentences; namely, the comparative point movement and bi preposition phrase movement. The focus of the sentences without movement would be a natural focus. However, if a movement occurs, it is often used to convey a contrastive focus. Thirdly, this thesis has analyzed the Chinese-Korean corpus and identified the Korean form that mainly corresponds to bi is boda. At the semantic level, boda is a comparative case marker/postposition particle in Korean. The basic boda sentence structure is “X i/ga (subject case marker)+ Yboda +R (result).” Moreover, Chinese and Korean both have adverbial and degree/quantity complements to add comparative meaning. But there are several differences in their usage. First, the adverbs in a bi sentence can only be adverbs of relative degree, such as geng (more) or hai (still) but not absolute-degree adverbs, such as hen (very), feichang (extremely). However, in Korean both relative degree adverbs and absolute degree adverbs can be used in boda sentences. Additionally, the syntactic position of degree complements or quantity complements also differs in these two languages. The complements of Chinese are located after the predicates; in contrast, the complements of Korean are located before predicates. At the discourse level, both Chinese and Korean feature a zero-pronoun in the anaphora system to elide a comparative subject. In terms of conveying contrastive focus, Chinese employs bi movement, and Korean utilizes comparative particles. Lastly, five Chinese textbooks that are commonly used in Taiwan and Korea are reviewed. Moreover, a simple lesson plan is further devised for Korean-speaking learners of Chinese. The ultimate goal of this thesis study is to produce results that will contribute to the teaching and learning of Chinese as a second language.

並列關鍵字

bi construction ； language typology ； discourse analysis ； bi construction movement ； bi construction ellipsis ； information structure ； contrastive analysis of Chinese and Korean ； Korean case maker boda