漢語「並且」和「而且」在語義與篇章上之差異及其教學建議

本研究以Halliday的三大語言純理功能（metafunction）—概念（ideational）、篇章（textual）、人際（interpersonal）為研究的架構，並以實際語料為分析來源，研究現代漢語「而且」和「並且」在語義以及篇章層面的語言現象，最後並試著把研究結果應用在教材與教學之中。本研究採用臺灣「中文詞彙特性速描系統」（Chinese Word Sketch Engine）以及「聯合知識庫」（UDN Data）之語料，蒐集含有「而且」、「並且」的語料各300筆，一共600筆語料進行分析研究。基於前人的研究，深入探討這兩個詞的語義特徵，並分析兩者篇章功能的異與同。首先，在語義層面，雖「而且」與「並且」」皆可表遞進功能，且皆具有其後多接「已然態」的語義特徵。然而，筆者亦發現了兩者有著不同之處，包括：「而且」前後分句多為遞進關係，其次為並列關係，而「並且」主要表達「並列」關係，其次為「遞進」關係，此外還能表動作先後的「先後關係」。二、「而且」所連接之單位則多有「靜態性」的語義特徵，而「並且」所連接之單位則多有「動態性」的語義特徵。其次，在篇章層面，「並且」呈現的範距較小，多連接詞彙、短語和分句等「局部性連接」，而「而且」的範距則較大，可放在句首連接兩個不同的句子，甚至段落，「整體性連接」之比例明顯較高。再者，在連詞語義弱化程度上，「並且」的語法化程度較低，而「而且」的語法化程度則較高，有轉換話題、開啟新話題、回復舊話題的功能，「並且」則無明顯此特徵。因此我們可推斷出「而且」相較於「並且」語義弱化程度更高。最後本研究針對「而且」和「並且」的在篇章層面的語義連貫的功能進行分析。最後，筆者根據本研究結果，評析四套通行於臺灣的對外華語教材──《遠東生活華語》、《當代中文》、《實用視聽華語》、《時代華語》，並將「而且」和「並且」的研究結果與建議應用於教學當中。

關鍵字

連詞；語義特徵；動態/靜態；範距；局部連接；整體連接；語法化；語義弱化；語義連貫

並列摘要

This thesis adopts the theoretical framework of Halliday’s metafunction, which includes ideational, textual, and interpersonal functions. With empirical data collected, we inspects the semantic and discourse aspects of two Chinese connectors – “erqie” and ”bingqie”. Moreover, the findings are applied for pedagogical purposes. Substantiated by empirical corpus, this research examined 600 tokens of data from two major corpora in Taiwan, in which 400 tokens were collected from Chinese Work Sketch Engine and 200 tokens from UDN Data. Based on former studies related to “erqie” and “bingqie”, this study further explored the semantic features between “erqie” and “bingqie” and differentiated them in discourse function. First, at the semantic level, “erqie” and “bingqie” both possess semantic features of “increment” and “coordination”. However, “erqie” primarily indicates ”incremental relation” while “bingqie” primarily expresses “coordinative relation” Moreover, the essential semantic difference between “erqie” and “bingqie” is that “bingqie” can also express a “temporal sequencing relation” of two coordinative clauses or phrases. Addtionally, “erqie” has the semantic features of “state” and “realis (actualization)”, while the semantic features of “bingqie” are “dynamics” and “realis (actualization)”. In terms of the discourse level, “bingqie” has a smaller scope and usually serves as local link to connect lexical, phrasal or clausal units. On the other hand, “Erqie” has a larger scope and can serve as global link not only to connect words and phrases but also sentences and paragraphs. As for the semantic reduction in these two conjunctions, “erqie” has displayed more grammaticalization, while “bingqie” has undergone less of it. Additionally, all use of “bingqie” in this study serves as a logical connector. In contrast, some instances of “erqie” appear to function as a discourse marker or a conversational strategy, such as to change topic, initiate a new topic, or resume an old topic. Finally, we compared and differentiate “bingqie” and “erqie” in terms of their coherence at the discourse level. Lastly, in applying results of the findings in this thesis for pedagogical purposes, we reviewed four Chinese textbooks widely used in Taiwan. Moreover, some pedagogical implications are further provided.