現代漢語「就」與日語對應形式之語義、篇章、語用對比分析

針對現代漢語關聯副詞「就」之研究，目前以語義層面的分析為多，篇章和語用層面的討論較少，因此本研究以Halliday提出之三大語言純理功能（metafunction）為分析架構，依概念（ideational）、篇章（textual）、人際（interpersonal）三方面將漢語「就」區分為語義的「就1」、語用的「就2」和篇章的「就3」，以期更全面地描述「就」的內涵並提出具體的判斷標準。　　以先行研究為基礎，筆者蒐集漢語書面語料545筆、漢日對比書面語料503筆，藉由實際語料的分析進一步釐清其用法。根據研究結果，就語義及功能而言，語義「就1」的核心義為「近」，延伸至時間上表示「時間快、早」，於數量上表示「數量少」，於條件上表示「條件充分」；語用「就2」為肯定說話者原先想法的「肯定預設」功能；篇章「就3」則為確定人、事、物之範圍，表示是這些而非另一些的「定指」功能。就分布而言，「就」最主要的兩個用法為語義的「就1」（52.2%）和語用的「就2」（43.7%），篇章的「就3」（4.1%）則使用比例相對低。而除了上述三項用法，本研究發現「就」尚有於小句中連接話題和焦點的「話題—焦點」功能，以及於句群中區分前後景分野的「後景—前景」功能，其中「就」位於前景的比例較高。而關於上述「就」之語義及功能的日語對應情況，本研究透過漢日對比分析，發現有36.78%的「就」在日語中無對應形式，意即可能為先行文獻所提及的迴避（avoidance）現象。並且，即使在有對應的類型中，亦有極大的日語翻譯部分並未能反映漢語本義。　　根據上述研究成果，本論文針對日籍漢語學習者提出「就」的教學語法描述，以及排序應為「就1」->「就3」->「就2」之教學應用建議。並且，由於漢語和日語在深層結構上有著極大差異，因而難以找到完全相應的形式，因此不可將日語的一些用法和「就」直接劃上等號，這是華語教師必須提醒日籍學習者之處。

關鍵字

關聯副詞「就」；定指標記；肯定預設；話題—焦點結構；前後景功能；漢日對比；迴避現象；教學排序

並列摘要

In previous research, discussions of the Chinese correlative adverb “Jiu” are more on the semantic level than pragmatic and discourse levels. In order to have a more comprehensive view, this study utilizes the theoretical framework of Halliday's metafunctions of language that encompass ideational, texual, and interpersonal functions, and then identifies three linguistic levels of Jiu, namely, “Jiu 1” (semantics), “Jiu 2” (pragmatics), and “Jiu 3” (discourse). 　This thesis goes a step further than previous research to include empirical data which comprise 545 and 503 from the respective Chinese and Japanese corpuses. Based on results of the findings, at the semantic level, the core meaning of “Jiu 1” is identified as “proximity”, extending to indicate “faster, earlier” in time, “fewer, less” in quantity, and “loose, sufficient” in condition. At the pragmatic level, the function of “Jiu 2” is to confirm a presupposition of a speaker or addressee. At the discourse level, “Jiu 3” serves to function as a definite marker. With respect to the frequency distribution of the three “jiu”,“Jiu 1”(52.2%) and “Jiu 2”(43.7%) comprise the most use, with “Jiu 3”(4.1%) as the least frequent category. Apart from the three meaning and functions of “jiu” at the three language levels; i.e. few/little (semantics), presupposition-confirmation (pragmatics), and definite marker (discourse), two additional discourse functions of “Jiu” are identified in this study. First, “Jiu” can be used to connect topic and focus in a sentence, functioning as a bridge between these two parts. Second, “Jiu” further serves to divide the foreground and background in a sentence group—with ”Jiu” more often occurring in the foreground part than in the background part. Moreover, concerning the counterparts of “Jiu” in Japanese, based on the results of the contrastive analysis in this study, it was found that not all uses of “Jiu” in Chinese have their counterparts in Japanese. Specifically, in our empirical data, there are 36.78% of “Jiu” in Chinese which have no corresponding uses in Japanese, which may have been the result of avoidance phenomenon, as previous research has suggested. Furthermore, a large percentage of the so-called Japanese counterparts may not fully capture the original meanings or functions of “Jiu” in Chinese. 　Based on the results of the findings in this study, some suggestions on the pedagogical sequencing of the various types of “jiu” in Chinese are provided (“Jiu1”->“Jiu3”->“Jiu2”) to be targeted at native-speaking Japanese learners of Chinese as a second language. Moreover, due to some possible intrinsic differences between Chinese and Japanese, it is not appropriate to aptly equate some Japanese translations to the meaning or functions of “Jiu” in Chinese. This is something that teachers of Chinese need to remind Japanese-speaking learners of Chinese.

並列關鍵字

correlative adverb “Jiu” ； definite marker ； presupposition ； topic-focus structure ； foreground and background ； contrastive analysis of Chinese and Japanese ； avoidance phenomenon ； pedagogical sequencing