1967年卑南族的祭儀歌聲—《歐樂思—史惟亮檔案》錄音資料研究

1960年代中期，史惟亮與許常惠曾進行多次的民歌採集，但在後續文獻中卻未見成果的錄音資料。2009年吳榮順曾進行《許常惠教授民歌採集運動時期歷史錄音還原第二期計畫期末報告》資料整理，其中雖有部分當年資料，但是成果顯示的卑南族錄音資料，卻未齊全，2013年由歐樂思神父長期保管的《歐樂思—史惟亮檔案》歸返台灣後，其中的卑南族錄音，補足了2009年許常惠資料中所缺少的部分。1967年採集團隊於卑南族南王、巴布麓、初鹿、知本與下賓朗五個部落進行錄音，史惟亮曾在其日記上書寫，希望將來能對於此批資料進行比較，可惜前人因種種原因，未能達成此願望，因此本論文選擇了卑南族音樂中的祭儀歌謠emayaayam與pairairaw兩部分，進行音樂分析比較，以接續1960年代民歌採集運動的目標。本論文第一章說明1967年卑南族錄音的資料狀況，錄音口述報導的曲數共有136首，其中含有許多重複錄音與多首接連演唱，經重新計算後總數為158首。第二章透過族人記憶勾勒出當時採集地點、引線者與歌者印象。引線者多為教職員、村長或是文化傳承者；歌者則是部落中擅唱者，且彼此多為親屬關係，因此當年採集可能為引線者收到採集的訊息，便連繫家族成員、居住在附近的族人，以及部落中擅於歌唱的族人錄音。當年參與錄音之歌者總共有50人，18位男性歌者、32位女性歌者。第三章與第四章分別為emayaayam與pairairaw的樣本分析。本論文以前人文獻為基礎，分析1967年的樣本。透過音樂比較，可見兩種歌謠從過去到現在的演唱形式並未改變，且也能見卑南族Puyuma卑南社群與Katratripulr知本社群兩個系統之差異。emaayayam共錄有9首樣本，從裝飾音部分觀察，發現南王與巴布麓部落使用之裝飾音較為相似；初鹿與下賓朗部落所使用的裝飾音則較接近，前者顯現Puyuma卑南社群系統，後者顯現了Katratripulr知本社群系統。 pairairaw樣本共錄有4首，其中初鹿與知本部落為非大獵祭pairairaw；下賓朗部落為大獵祭pairairaw。透過音樂分析與比較發現，下賓朗部落的大獵祭pairairaw旋律，含有南王（Puyuma卑南社群系統）與初鹿（Katratripulr知本社群系統）部落大獵祭pairairaw相似的輪廓走向，可見兩個系統的融合現象。另也發現，初鹿部落與知本部落之非大獵祭pairairaw旋律相近；而知本部落的非大獵祭pairairaw旋律又與此部落之大獵祭pairairaw相似，最後歸整出演唱形式、樂句、歌詞內容與模式乃是辨別大獵祭與非大獵祭的方式。

關鍵字

歐樂思—史惟亮檔案；民歌採集；卑南族音樂； emayaayam ； pairairaw

並列摘要

In the mid-1960s, Wei-Liang Shih and Tsang-Houei Hsu had done several times of the folk music collection; however, in the follow-up literature, there was no recording of the results. In 2009, Rung-Shun Wu had compiled the data “The Final Report of the Second Phase of the Historical Recording of Hsu Tsang-Houei’s Folk Song Collection Movement.” Although there are some data from the collection movement, the results show that the recording of the Pinuyumayan are not complete. In 2013, “Alois Osterwalder - Shi Wei-Liang Archive,” which was kept by Osterwalder for a long time, was returned to Taiwan. The recordings of Pinuyumayan has complemented the missing parts of Tsang-Houei Hsu’s recordings. In 1967, the collection team recorded the recordings in five Pinuyumayan tribes: Puyuma, Papulu, Mulivelivek, Katratripulr, Pinaski. Wei-Liang Shi once wrote in the diary that he hoped to compare the recordings with each other. Unfortunately, the hoping is failed to achieve for various reasons. Therefore, the ritual songs emayaayam and pairairaw in the Pinuyumayan music are selected and analyzed in this thesis to continue achieving the goal of the folk music collection movement in the 1960s. The first chapter explains the situation of the Pinuyumayan recordings in 1967. There are 136 songs reported by the collector, including some repetitive ones and different songs that have been sung together. After recalculation, the total number of songs is 158. The second chapter outlines the place of collection, the guides and the singers through the memory of the Pinuyumayan people. The guides includes faculty members, chiefs of village and cultural inheritors; the singers are people who were good at singing in the tribe. Most of them are relatives. Therefore, it is possible that the guides received the message of collecting folk songs, and then contacted the family members, and the people living in the neighborhood to do the recordings. The singers who participated in the recording had a total of 50 people, 18 male singers and 32 female singers. The third and fourth chapters are analysis of emayaayam (songs sung by women in the weeding festival) and pairairaw (songs sung by men in the hunting ceremony). Based on previous literature, the 1967 recordings are analyzed. Through the comparison of music, it is illustrated that the singing styles of emayaayam and pairairaw have not changed from the past to the present, and that the difference between the Puyuma community and the Katratripulr community can be seen. 9 versions of emaayayam were recorded. It is found that the ornaments used by Puyuma and Papulu are similar; on the other hand, the ornaments used by Mulivelivek and Pinaski are closer. The former manifests the Puyuma community system, and the latter shows the Katratripulr community system. 4 versions of pairairaw were recorded. Among them, the pairairaw from Mulivelivek and Katratripulr were not sung at the hunting ceremony, while the one from Pinaski was sung at the hunting ceremony. Through music analysis and comparison, it is found that the melody of Pinaski’s pairairaw has a similar melody to Puyuma’s (Puyuma community system) and Mulivelivek’s (Katratripulr community system). From this phenomenon, the fusion of two systems can be seen. It addition, the melody of Mulivelivek’s pairairaw, which was not sung at the hunting ceremony, is similar to the Katratripulr’s; and the melody of Katratripulr’s pairairaw, which was not sung at the hunting ceremony, is similar to the one that was sung in the hunting festival. Finally, the form of singing, phrases, lyrics and patterns are the way to distinguish the difference between the pairairaw sung in the hunting ceremony and the one that was not sung in the hunting ceremony.