【作者】 陈永生；

【导师】 王元鹿；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 汉语言文字学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 古汉字和古埃及圣书字都在人类文明早期独立地实现了完全记录语言的目标,成为成熟文字。成熟文字是通过完全记录语言中可独立运用的最小单位——词,来实现完全记录语言的目标的。成熟文字记录语言技术的核心就是表词技术,即“表词方式”。词有音和义两个方面,古汉字和古埃及圣书字等自源意音文字(还包括苏美尔文字、玛雅文字等)都运用了三种基本的表词方式：(1)从词义方面着手制造文字的表意方式；(2)从词音方面着手制造文字的表音方式；(3)从词义和词音两方面同时着手制造文字的意音结合方式。而这三种基本表词方式的基础是基本字符的制造技术,即基本字符的生成方式。本论文从基本字符生成方式、表意方式、表音方式、意音结合方式等四个方面,对古汉字和古埃及圣书字的表词方式进行了系统的比较,并在比较中注意考察了自源意音文字制造与人类认知心理、文明状况(自然环境、物质文化状况、精神文化状况)、语言特点之间的关系。一、基本字符生成方式的比较。基本字符的创制过程,可以分作两个环节,一是取象,二是符号化。古汉字和古埃及圣书字都通过“近取诸身,远取诸物”的方式进行字符取象,而且取象内容都贯彻了人本主义原则,对人体进行了大量取象。而同时,因为两个民族生活在不同的自然环境中,创造了不一样的物质文化和精神文化,所以两种文字基本字符的取象又存在明显的地域差异和社会文化差异。在基本字符的符号化方式上,两种文字存在很大差异。古汉字基本字符的符号化方式是写意的,圣书字基本字符的符号化方式是写实的。这主要与两种文字社会功能的差异以及两个民族艺术精神的差异有关。二、表意方式的比较。古汉字和古埃及圣书字中,表意方式都是文字系统的基础,它产生最早,具有直觉自然性,积淀着古老的历史文化。基于人类思维规律的共同性,两种文字都运用了所见即所得式、引申式、组合式和补充式等基本表意方式。相比之下,古汉字表意方式独立性强、在文字系统的地位比较稳固,而圣书字中表意方式独立性弱,有加阴性音符和提示符的现象。这主要与语言差异有关。两种文字基本字符引申式表意都通过范畴化、转喻和隐喻等基本方式来实现,然而引申方向又存在差异,表现出不同的心理内容。这是由不同的自然环境、不同物质文化和精神文化引起的。三、表音方式的比较。古汉字和古埃及圣书字都通过表音方式最终实现完整记录语言的目标。两种文字表音方式的实质都是“音借方式”,借表意字表音,使用“借音符”。两种文字的借音符的共同性质是：(一)借音符具有兼职性,(二)借音符与语音系统之间不存在对应关系和分配关系,(三)借音符的数量远远多于拼音文字字母,(四)借音符表音不完全准确。但古汉字与古埃及圣书字的音借方式是有差异的。古汉字使用整体性音借方式,而圣书字使用分析性音借方式。古汉字借音符的数量明显多于圣书字借音符的数量。古汉字借音符的构字量明显低于圣书字借音符的构字量。这主要与两种语言的差异有关。古汉语词汇一般都是统一的单音节结构,词法变化具有极强的熔合性。古埃及语词根辅音结构长短不一,词根和词缀具有易离析性。四、意音结合方式的比较。古汉字和古埃及圣书字都选择意音结合方式来优化意音文字系统,从而逐步成为以意音结构为主体的文字系统。两种文字意音结合方式的共性包括：(一)意音结合方式的产生稍晚于表音方式(音借方式),产生的真正动因是社会对文字记录精确性的要求,产生的文字内部基础是音借方式；(二)意音结合方式都有补音式、补意式和直拼式三种类型,其中直拼式生成能力最强；(三)意音结合方式都是以表音为主的,意音结构本质上是一种依靠义符标示的表音结构；(四)两种文字在通过意音结合方式进行系统优化后,都进入了表词方式完全成熟和稳定的自源意音文字高级阶段。两种文字意音结合方式的差异主要有两个方面。(一)古汉字中存在“变形式补音”现象,而圣书字中几乎见不到变形式补音。这主要是因为变形式补音多是在组合式表意结构上的改造,而圣书字中组合式表意非常少见。另外,圣书字基本字符写实性的符号化方式也使得字符清晰可辨,不易随意改造和更换。(二)古埃及圣书字中的意音结合方式常常会使用多个义符,而在古汉字中较为少见。这可能与汉字的方块结构不容许更多的附加成分有关。通过古汉字与古埃及圣书字的比较,我们从方法论角度提出了自源意音文字研究的四个视角——自源意音文字之“四观”,即语言观、心理观、社会文化观、技术观。通过“四观”看自源意音文字,有利于扩大我们的视野,提高我们对自源意音文字性质的认识,同时指导我们开辟一些有重要意义的新研究领域。更多还原

【Abstract】 The ancient Chinese writing and the Egyptian Hieroglyphic are both mature writing systems. They have both independently achieved the goal of recording language fully in the early period of human civilization. A full writing system realizes the goal of a complete record of language by recording every smallest independent unit of the language system——word. Therefore, the core skill of recording language is the "Method of Recording Words". Each word has two aspects:sound and meaning. The ancient Chinese writing and Egyptian writing (also the Sumerian writing and the Maya writing) apply three basic methods of recording words:1. the method of recording word meaning; 2. the method of recording word sound; 3. the method of recording meaning and sound combinedly. And the foundation of the above three basic methods is the method of creating basic characters.This thesis is a systematic comparative study of the ancient Chinese writing and Egyptian hieroglyphic from four aspects:the method of creating basic characters, the method of recording word meaning, the method of recording word sound, and the method of recording meaning and sound combinedly. In the comparative study, we try to investigate the relationship between the creation of writing and human cognition, civilization (natural environment, material and cultural situation, spiritual situation), and characteristics of languages.First of all is the comparison of the method of creating basic characters. The creation of basic characters can be divided into two steps:first, to abstract an image, and second, to symbolize that image. For image abstraction, both ancient Chinese writing and Egyptian hieroglyphic apply the method of "abstracting from both self and distant things". Following the principle of humanism, both writing systems have abstracted from human body a large number of images. Meanwhile, because the two nations living in different natural environments have created different material and spiritual culture, the images they abstracted reflect obvious regional and cultural differences. Besides, there is also a big difference in the symbolization of basic characters. Symbolization of basic Chinese characters is sketchy and nonobjective, while that of Egyptian hieroglyphs is more realistic. The difference of symbolization bears some relevance to the different social functions of the two writing systems and the different aesthetic spirit of the two nations.The second is the comparison of the method of recording word meaning. The method of recording word meaning is the foundation of both ancient Chinese writing and Egyptian writing. They are created early in the writing history, intuitive and natural, and embody rich culture of ancient civilization. Based on the common law of human thinking, the two writing systems both employ some basic methods of recording meaning such as "what you see is what you get", extensions, combination and complement. Comparatively speaking, the meaning expression in ancient Chinese writing is more independent and more systematically solid, while that in ancient Egyptian writing is less independent with the addition of phonograms indicating feminine nouns and diacritic symbols. The difference is mainly related to linguistic features of the two languages. The method of extension of both writing systems is realized by the means of categorization, metonymy and metaphor. However, there are some differences in the direction of extension, revealing different psychological content. This is due to the difference of natural environment, material culture and spiritual culture of the two nations.The third is the comparison of the method of recording word sound. It is by the method of phonetic expression that the ancient Chinese writing and ancient Egyptian writing have realized a complete record of language. The essence of phonetic expression of both writing systems is "phonetic loan", i.e. borrowing sense characters as "loan phonograms" to express the sound of new words. The common characteristics of "loan phonograms" of both writing systems are as followings:1. multiple functions; 2. no corresponding relation or assigned relation with the phonetic system; 3. the number of "loan phonograms" is much larger than the number of letters in alphabetic writings; 4. lack of exactness. However, there are also obvious differences between the methods of phonetic loans of the two writing systems. The ancient Chinese writing applies a holistic borrowing pattern, while Egyptian hieroglyphic applies an analytical borrowing pattern. The number of loan phonograms in ancient Chinese writing is much lager than that of the Egyptian hieroglyphic. This mainly has something to do with the difference of the two languages. Ancient Chinese words are mainly monosyllabic and their derivation is such a fusional type that it’s very hard for people to separate the roots and affixes. But the Egyptian words are mainly polysyllabic with clear roots of consonantal structures. The roots and the affixes can be easily separated.The fourth is the comparison of the method of recording meaning and sound combinedly.1. Both Chinese writing and Egyptian hieroglyphic employ semantic-phonetic compounds to optimize the writing systems, and so gradually become pervaded by such compounds.2. In both writing systems, the implement of the combined method is later than the method of recording sound. The real drive of the new method is the social demand for exact writing record. And its interior foundation is the method of phonetic loan.3. Both writing systems have applied three types of semantic-phonetic compounds, such as phonetic complement to ideograms, meaning complement to phonograms and direct combination. Among the three types, direct combination has the strongest power of new character creation. 4. In both writing systems, the semantic-phonetic compounds are in fact phonetic structures with meaningful determinatives.5. After the systematic application of semantic-phonetic compounds, the two writing systems both become mature, stable and advanced in the aspect of character creation and word expression.There are also some differences between the methods of semantic-phonetic compound of the two writing systems:1. in ancient Chinese writing, there is a phenomenon of "phonetic complement by changing original form of characters", while in Egyptian writing there is not. Because this method is a reform based on semantic compounds, while in Egyptian writing, semantic compounds are very rare. Besides, the realistic symbolization of basic characters in the Egyptian writing makes each character more distinguishable and recognizable, and less likely to be changed or reformed; 2. The semantic-phonetic compounds in Egyptian hieroglyphic often employ many determinatives, which is rare in the ancient Chinese writing. It’s probably because that the square-formed Chinese characters exclude excessive complements.By the comparison of the ancient Chinese writing and the Egyptian hieroglyphic, the thesis puts forward four perspectives for the study of independently created classical writing systems, such as Chinese, Egyptian, Sumerian, and Mayan writings:the linguistic perspective, the psychological perspective, the societal-cultural perspective, and the technological perspective. Studying classical writing systems from the above four perspectives can broaden our eyesight, deepen our understanding, and lead us to new significant research fields.更多还原