卡那卡那富語受益與受害概念的語言表徵

Linguistic Representations of Benefaction and Malefaction in Kanakanavu

楊佳縈(Chia-Ying Yang)

指導教授 ： 宋麗梅

國立臺灣大學/文學院/語言學研究所/碩士(2015年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2015.02712

摘要

本論文探討高雄那瑪夏區卡那卡那富語的受益(benefaction)及受害(adversity/malefaction)概念，旨在提供完整的構詞句法和語意特性之描述。受益和受害皆談論事件參與者的被作用性，因此與蒙受關係(affectedness)有關(Smith, 2005)。根據Van Valin & LaPolla (1997)對受益範疇的分類，卡那卡那富語受益事件可分為三類─原因(reason)受益、替代(substitution)受益和接受(reception)受益。原因受益指出事件中存在一參與者，此參與者間接導致事件的發生，同時也能從事件結果得到喜悅或滿足等正面感受。替代受益在於事件的主事者能替代受益者(beneficiary)執行事件動作。第三種是接受受益，接收者從事件中得到物件，成為物件的所有者，因而受益。有趣的是，我們也觀察到融合受益。融合受益由產出(creating)事件和轉移(transfer)事件組成。一來，受益者免於執行產出物件的職責；二來，受益者能夠任意使用物件。
此外，此研究將致使句型視為受益句構的一種，原因在於致使概念也表達蒙受關係。在致使受益事件中，受益者通常為致使者(causer)，受役者(causee)被致使替代致使者執行事件動作。相對地，在致使受害事件中，致使者無法避免受害事件之發生，而蒙受受害結果。
相對於受益，受害概念描述事件參與者的被作用性為負面。卡那卡那富有三種型式可表達─(動詞)詞彙語意、受事焦點標記-ee和致使句型。觀察發現受害者(maleficiary)通常和被作用物間有領屬關係，此領屬關係將被作用物所承受的負面效果傳導至受害者。
本論文期望透過描述性探究，提供完整的句法語意分析，為卡那卡那富語的保存工作貢獻微薄之力。

關鍵字

卡那卡那富語 ； 蒙受關係 ； 受害概念 ； 受益概念 ； 致使句構 ； 轉移動詞

並列摘要

The present thesis aims to explore benefaction and adversity (or malefaction) in Kanakanavu, an indigenous language spoken in the mountain areas of southern Taiwan. The two notions express affectedness because both involve a participant that is acted on in some way by an event (Smith, 2005). Based on Van Valin & LaPolla (1997), Kanakanavu benefaction can be categorized into three types including reason, substitution, and reception. For benefaction of reason, the beneficiary is an indirect cause of the event and benefited by obtaining satisfaction or enjoyment from it. The second type is benefaction of substitution. The benefited participant is exempted from the duty to carry out an action since someone substitutes as the actor. The third type concerns reception. The benefaction lies in that the beneficiary can receive a thing as the possessor. Intriguingly, we also observe an integrated type that comprises substitution and reception—recipient-benefaction. A recipient-benefactive event is composed of a creating scene followed by a transfer scene. The recipient is absent from the creating event and only partakes in the second event as a recipient that can engage with the given object.
The research also includes the causative as a type of benefaction in that it relates to the expression of affectedness. In terms of the benefactive-causative, the beneficiary is usually the causer though it can be the causee. The causer is benefited by having the causee perform an action for himself/herself. On the other hand, the adversative-causative describes that the causer could have prevented a negative event from taking place but failed to.
As opposed to benefaction, adversity or malefaction depicts an event the relevant participant (maleficiary) evaluates as bad. In Kanakanavu, three grammatical means are deployed for encoding—(1) (verb) lexical semantics, (2) the PV marker –ee, and (3) the causative. It is found that the maleficiary often holds possessive control over the object that is directly affected.
In sum, the thesis endeavors to document the grammatical peculiarities of Kanakanvu through the specific topic of benefaction and adversity, hoping that the efforts will make contribution to preserving the linguistic treasure in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

Kanakanavu ； affectedness ； adversity ； benefaction ； causative ； transfer verb

參考文獻

Li, Paul Jen-kuei et al. (1997). The Formosan Languages in Kaohsiung [In Chinese]. Kaohsiung: The Government of Kaohsiung.

Tsuchida, Shigeru. (1976). Reconstruction of Proto-Tsouic phonology. Study of Languages & Cultures of Asia & Africa, Monograph Series, No.5. Tokyo: Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.

— (1998). Recipients and ‘give’ constructions. In Willy van Langendonck & William van Belle (eds.), The Dative, Volume 2: Theoretical and Contrastive Studies, 1–28. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Chang, Anna Hsiou Chuan. (2006). Paiwan main clause structures. A reference grammar of Paiwan. The Australian National University, 60-80.

Tryon, Darrell. (1995). Proto-Austronesian and the major Austronesian subgroups. In Peter Bellwood, James J. Fox & Darrell Tryon (Eds.), The Austronesians: Historical and Comparative Perspectives, p. 17-38. Canberra: Department of Anthropology, Australian National University.