【作者】 郭红；

【导师】 马庆株；

【作者基本信息】 南开大学 ， 汉语言文字学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 本文基于汉语作为第二语言教学的语法偏误,以语义功能语法理论为指导,从句法、语义、表达等层面研究了汉语语气范畴的若干具体问题。文章从语义语法范畴的角度分析了汉语语气范畴内为外国人难以掌握的几组语言形式,讨论了每组近义表达形式在句法、语义及表达上的差别,并力求找到适于在教学中运用的强制性或倾向性的规则和条件。在此基础上,尝试运用功能语言学、认知语言学及语法化和主观化等理论解释这种差别产生的原因。文章注重语义功能语法的研究成果与汉语作为第二语言教学实际的结合,主要研究了传信语气词“嘛”和“呗”、用于假设复句的语气词“吧”和“呢”、语气副词“幸亏”和“好在”、以及语气副词“原来”和“其实”的句法、语义及功能差异。文章分为六章。第一章引言说明了全文的理论前提和研究方法,概要介绍了所要讨论的主要内容和理论背景,指出了可能存在的问题和不足,以及今后进一步研究的方向。第二章分析了汉语传信语气词“嘛”和“呗”的差别。在前人指出二者都表“显而易见”、“劝阻”语气的基础上,指出“嘛”和“呗”表示的语气义有交叉,都可表示“显而易见”的确认类语气,但二者各有不同的核心语气义。语义上,“嘛”重在说明“道理显而易见”,隐含着对听者的指责、不满等态度,要求对方行事,语气强烈；“呗”侧重于“情形唯一、无特别之处”,不一定要求对方行事,语气较弱。句法上,二者都主要用于陈述句和祈使句,“嘛”还可用于疑问句和反问句,与语气副词的结合面宽,可与能愿动词共现。功能上,“嘛”重在说理,“呗”重在道情。除此之外,“嘛”还有充当话题标记、表示权势关系中的赞许肯定和亲密关系中撒娇任性等语气的用法,这是其语气类型较“呗”丰富的表现。正因为此,“嘛”的使用频率大大高于“呗”。“嘛”、“呗”分布的语体类型基本一致,都集中在小说、散文、戏剧、谈话、相声等对话性强、口语性强的语体、文体中。第三章对用于假设复句中假设分句末的语气词“吧”和“呢”做了分析。首先证明这种分布的“吧”和“呢”并不独立负载假设语气义,而是表示停顿、明确假设复句前后分句的界线,该复句的假设义则由句中假设连词、假设语气词“的话”以及对举结构等负载。之后的分析显示,语气词“吧”多用于两项假设对举的情况,“呢”则多用于单项假设句,用“呢”的假设分句比用“吧”的假设分句中出现的假设连词数量更多、种类更丰富；用“呢”的假设分句中的谓语倾向于用非自主动词,用“吧”的假设分句中的谓语倾向于用自主动词,这受各自所在假设句语义侧重的制约；用“呢”的假设分句与用“吧”的假设分句中共现的其他语言成分也有所不同。用“吧”的假设复句主要表示“左右为难”、“无奈”的选择,其功能是主观假设；用“呢”的假设复句则是客观指出某种假设下的结果,其功能是客观推定。总体来说,在相同字数的语料中用“呢”的假设分句数量比用“吧”的多,假设分句末的“吧”大多可由“呢”替换。本章还指出了“吧”和“呢”替换的适宜性句法条件。本章最后认为,归根结底,句末带有语气词“吧”、“呢”的假设复句,其语义内涵、句法特点及表达功能都是由语气词“吧”、“呢”各自基本语气及传信度的不同决定的,前者基本语气义为不确定、缓和,后者基本语气义为肯定、确信。第四章对意义相近、第二语言教学高级阶段容易出现偏误的语气副词“幸亏’和“好在”的异同进行了梳理和辨析。二者的相同点是：语义上,都可以表示有利条件；句法上,都不能单独使用、能够出现在相同的句法位置。本章的考察与分析显示,二者的不同之处在于：“幸亏”表达的有利条件是说话人主观上认为偶然出现的,这个有利条件表达的信息是超预期的,在语义模式中“由于缺乏有利条件而导致的不利结果”是凸显角色；而“好在”表达的有利条件是说话人主观上认为惯常存在的,该有利条件表达的信息是预期的,在语义模式中“由于有利条件而出现的有利结果”是凸显角色。另外,“好在”表达的有利条件从感情色彩方面来说可以是积极或消极的,从情态意义来说可以是现实或非现实的；而“幸亏”表达的有利条件只能是积极的、现实的。第五章先指出语气副词“原来”和“其实”在语气上的异同。共同点是后面所说都是实际情况；差异在于“原来”表示的语气“恍然大悟”与其来源即时间名词“原来”有关、与时间因素有关,而“其实”的语气义则与偏正词组“其实”有关、指出真实的本质的情况、与事情真相有关。这两个词的语义共性导致了留学生使用中的混淆,二者的语气差异则决定了各自不同的句法表现和表达功能。在句法上,二者与语气词的共现都集中在对话中,这是语气词在使用中表达交互主观性的需要；与“原来”共现的语气词主要是“啊”,与“其实”共现的语气词有“啊、呢、吧、呀、呐、嘛”等；与“原来”共现的语气副词以指明类、性质特点类和感叹类为多,与“其实”共现的语气副词则主要是断定、证实、疑问等小类,同中有异。语气副词“原来”常用于陈述句和感叹句,“其实”则除用于陈述句之外,极少的还可用于反问句、感叹句和祈使句；二者都不能用于真性的是非疑问句,这跟二者都是指出实际情况的语义有关；“其实”常用于“是……的”强调句,“原来”则多用于动词为“是”的判断句；“其实”后可跟假设句、条件句等非现实句：“原来”后则不能出现非现实句。“原来”的“恍然大悟”的语气决定了其上下文常有表短时、短暂动作或出乎意料义的词语,“其实”的“否定上文”的语气则决定了其上文常有表示揣摩估计、表面现象、不十分确定的主观推测、常情常理等意义的词语及否定副词。根据语义的决定作用,我们把“原来”和“其实”的功能分别概括为“指明原因”和“否定上文”。本章最后分析了“原来”和“其实”在使用中的互换条件：在否定句中或者上文有认识义动词时,二者可互换,但语气仍各有侧重；“原来”所在句为感叹句,前后有疑问句,上下文有表短时、短暂动作的词语或出乎意料义副词,在一些固定的判断句中时,不能换为“其实”；转折复句中倾向于用“其实”。第六章简单总结了本文各章的主要内容,并概括了文章的创新点和不足之处。更多还原

【Abstract】 Based on grammatical error analysis of Chinese in second language teaching and the theory of semantic functional grammar, this dissertation studies several specific problems in Chinese mood category from syntactic, semantic and expressive levels. It analyzes several groups of language forms which are difficult for foreigners to understand from semantic and grammatical perspectives, discusses the syntactic, semantic and expressive differences of synonymous language forms, aiming to discover the compulsory and tendentious rules and conditions which are appropriate for language teaching. Meanwhile this paper attempts to explain the reasons for the differences by means of the theories of functional linguistics, cognitive linguistics, grammaticalization and subjectivisation. Emphasizing the combination of research results of semantic functional grammar and teaching practices of Chinese as a second language, this paper mainly focuses on the syntactic, semantic and functional differences of evidential modal particles "ma" and "bei", subjunctive modal particles "ba" and "ne", modal adverbs "xing kui" and "hao zai", "yuan lai" and "qi shi"The present research is composed of six chapters. Chapter one is a general introduction, providing the background, overview and theoretical rational of the topic and presenting the possible limitations of the study and suggestions for future research.Chapter two analyzes and compares the differences between evidential modal particles "ma" and "bei". Based on the other scholars’research results that both indicates the mood of obviousness and dissuasion, this study further points out that there are overlaps between the two particles, that is, both can indicate the confirmative mood of obviousness, but they have different core semantic mood. Semantically, "ma", with a stronger mood, emphasizes "obviousness in reason", implying the criticism and dissatisfaction to the listener and demanding the listener to act; "bei", with a weaker mood, stresses "unique situation, no something special", not necessarily asking the listener to act. Grammatically both can be used in declarative and imperative sentences, and "ma" can also be used in interrogative sentences and rhetorical questions, having more flexible combination with mood adverbs and co-occurrence with can-wish verbs. Functionally "ma" puts emphasis on "convincing with reason" while "bei’pays more attention to "indicating some situation". Besides, "ma" can be used as topic markers, indicating approval and affirmative in power relationship, and coquetry and capriciousness in intimate relationships, which shows that "ma" has more mood types than "bei" and which also results in the higher frequency in use of "ma". Both "ma" and "bei" can be used in conversational and colloquial styles such as novels, proses, dramas, talks and cross-talks.Chapter three explores the modal particles "ba" and "ne" in complex sentences of suppositional relation. "Ba" and "ne" do not independently denote suppositional mood, but signify pause, clear-cut bounds of the two causes of suppositional complex sentences while the suppositional meaning is shown through suppositional conjunctions, suppositional modal particles "de hua" and suppositional parallel structures. The study shows that "ba" is more used in two suppositional contexts whereas "ne" is more used in single suppositional clauses; more suppositional conjunctions are used in "ne" suppositional causes than in "ba" causes; predicates in "ne" causes are more likely nonvolitional verbs whereas those in "ba" causes are more inclined to be volitional verbs, which is constrained by their respective suppositional semantic focus; the linguistic components of co-occurrence of "ne" and "ba" clauses are different as well:"ba" suppositional complex sentences mainly indicates "to be in a dilemma, to have no choice" with the function of subjective supposition, while "ne" suppositional complex sentences denotes the outcomes of objective supposition with the function of objective inference. Generally speaking, in the language materials of same number of characters, there are more "ne" clauses than "ba" ones and most "ba" clauses can be replaced by "ne" ones. Meanwhile, the appropriate syntactic conditions for substitution of "ba" and "ne" have also been explained. This chapter concludes that the semantic connotation, syntactic features and expressive functions of suppositional complex sentences with modal particles "ba" and "ne" depend on their different basic semantic mood and evidentiality: the former’s basic mood is uncertainty and appease while the latter’s basic mood is certainty and assuredness.Chapter four compares and contrasts the similarities and differences of modal adverbs "xing kui" and "hao zai" which are almost synonymous and easy to be used wrongly by intermediate and advanced second language learners. The similarities of the two are:semantically both indicate advantages and favorable conditions; syntactically both cannot be used independently and can appear in same syntactic positions. The differences of the two are:"xing kui" means the advantages which are subjectively thought by the speaker to come about by accident, to be unexpected, and in semantic patterns "unfavorable consequences resulting from the absence of advantages" are prominent; "hao zai" conveys the advantages which are subjectively thought by the speaker to be habitually present, to be expected, and in semantic patterns what is prominent is the favorable consequences resulting from advantages. Moreover, the advantages "hao zai" can express are emotionally positive or negative and modally realis or unrealis whereas those "xing kui" denotes are only positive and realis.Chapter five points out similarities and differences between the modal adverbs "yuan lai" and "qi shi".The similarity exists in the following contents which they connect are actual situations. The differences of the two is:the modal adverb "yuan lai" which means "suddenly enlighted" came from the time noun of "yuan lai",related with time factor; while the modal meaning of "qi shi" is connected with attributive compound "qi shi",pointing out real, natural condition, and the truth of matter. The semantic general character of these two words causes the confusion for the foreign students, and the modal differences between them lead to respectively different syntax performance and expressive function. In the syntax, the co-occurence between those two words and modal particles centralizes in the dialogue, and this is the request of expressing the interactive subjectivity in the use of modal particles.The co-occurrence modal particles for "yuan lai" is "ah", and for "qi shi" are "ah", "ne", "ba", "ya", "na", "ma", and so on. Most of the co-occurrence modal adverbs category for "yuan lai" are designating, characteristic and natural, and exclamatory categories; while most of the co-occurrence modal adverbs for "qi shi" are sub-categories such as judging, confirming, and doubtful categories. There are similarities and differences between the co-occurrences of the two words.Modal adverb’yuan lai’commonly used in declarative sentences and exclamatory sentences, while "qi shi" is used in declarative sentences, and in some rare situations such as rhetorical questions, exclamatory sentences, and imperative sentences; Both of them cannot be used in "yes or no" question, since they all point out actual situations. "Qi shi" is always used in emphasis sentences like "shi...de", and "yuan lai" is always used in adjudgement sentence whose verb is "shi" "qi shi" can be followed with the non-realistic sentences like postulate sentences or conditionals; "yuan lai" can not be followed with non-realistic sentences.The modal meaning of "suddenly enlighted" for "yuan lai" results in the words with meaning of short time, punctual action or unexpected matter in context. For "qi shi", the modal meaning of the negation of above leads to some words or negative adverbs with meaning as estimating, surface appearance, indistinct subjective speculation, common sense above.According to semantic decision function, we summarize the functions of "yuan lai" and "qi shi" respectively as the indication reason and the negation in preceding text.This chapter analyzed the substitution condition of "yuan lai" and "qi shi" finally.When both words are in negative sentences, or with recognize-meaning verbs above, they can be changed with each other, but the words are still emphasized on different modal. "Yuan lai" can not be changed to "qi shi" in following circumstances such as being in exclamatory sentences, next to interrogative sentences, with words which means short time, punctual action or unexpected adverbs, and being in some fixed adjudgement sentence."Qi shi" is tended to be used in disjunctive compound sentences.更多还原