- 期刊
漢日同形詞「未來」與「將來」之語內及跨語言對比分析與教學建議
A Comparative and Contrastive Study of Chinese and Japanese Homographs weilai and jianglai and its Pedagogical Suggestions
摘要
漢語「未來」與「將來」、日語「未来」（mirai）與「将来」（shorai）在語內分別屬於近義詞關係，而漢語「未來」與日語「未来」、漢語「將來」與日語「将来」皆為漢日同形詞。本研究先經由文獻回顧，梳理前人有關漢語近義詞與漢日同形詞的辨析方法，再透過辭典釋義、語料庫語料分析與問卷調查，觀察目標詞語在語內的異同，並進行跨語言對比。漢語辭典對「未來」與「將來」的詞性及共現時間詞未做說明；日語辭典則說明「未来」與「将来」皆為名詞，「将来」另可作副詞用，此外，「未来」共現時間詞的表達意義比「将来」長，能達數百年之久。語料分析結果顯示，漢語「未來」及「將來」最常擔任狀語表示時間，其次為定語，「未來」共現時間詞的範圍從數十天到數十年，「將來」則相對短暫；日語「未来」主要擔任定語，「将来」則擔任狀語表示時間，「未来」無共現時間詞語例，「将来」共現時間詞的表達意義可達數十年。在跨語言對比上，漢語「未來」與日語「将来」的主要功能都是擔任狀語表示時間，其共現時間詞的範圍皆從數十天到數十年，兩者都較常修飾抽象詞語，也常用來表示「人事物的未來與將來」。經由前述分析得知，漢語「未來」對應的日語詞語應為「将来」，而非「未来」。針對漢語母語者及日籍漢語學習者的問卷調查結果揭示，日籍漢語學習者受到母語影響，使用漢語時傾向選用「將來」作為狀語表示時間，且對「將來」共現時間詞範圍的認知也達數十年，與漢語母語者對「未來」的使用偏好與認知相似。基於這些結果，本研究檢視兩套臺灣主流漢語教材，提出教材評述與調整的意見，並針對日籍漢語學習者提供「未來」與「將來」的教學建議。
並列摘要
Chinese weilai (未來, 'future') and jianglai (將來, 'future') are intralingual synonyms, so are Japanese mirai (未来, 'future') and shorai (将来, 'future'). Additionally, weilai and mirai are interlingual homographs, so are jianglai and shorai. This study first reviews literature to discuss the methods of analyzing Chinese synonyms and Chinese-Japanese homographs, and then compares the words aforementioned by using dictionary definitions, corpus analysis, and questionnaire. It is found that Chinese dictionaries do not explain the word classes nor the words expressing time that often co-occur with weilai and jianglai (i.e., collocations) and that Japanese dictionaries introduce both mirai and shorai as nouns and shorai as an adverb, too. Japanese dictionaries also indicate that the words expressing time that often co-occur with mirai bear longer time span than those with shorai, which could refer to several hundred years. The corpus analysis results show that both weilai and jianglai are mostly used as adverbials to express time and secondly used as attributives. The time span of the collocations of weilai ranges from few days to decades, while the time span of the collocations of jianglai is relatively short. The corpus analysis results also reveal that mirai is mainly used as an attributive and shorai is mainly used as an adverbial to express time. The time expressions in the co-occurrence words with mirai cannot be observed because of lacking examples, while the time expressions in the co-occurrence words with shorai could indicate the time expressing several decades. In terms of interlingual comparisons, both weilai and shorai are mostly used as adverbials to express time; the time expressed by their co-occurrence words can indicate decades; they often modify abstract nouns and they are often used to refer to someone's or something's future. Based on the findings, we conclude that the counterpart of weilai should be jianglai instead of mirai. The questionnaire results from Chinese native speakers and Japanese-speaking learners of Chinese indicate that Japanese-speaking learners of Chinese are often influenced by their native language. They prefer using jianglai as an adverbial to express time and consider that the collocations of jianglai could denote the time for decades. These preference and understanding are the same as the Chinese native speakers' preference and understanding of weilai. Given the above findings, this study then examines the common Chinese textbooks nowadays in Taiwan and gives advice, and provides pedagogical suggestions of weilai and jianglai for Japanese-speaking learners of Chinese.