語意延伸與受惠者角色的匯聚：以客語「分」與「摎」
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2014-05-??
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
英語學系
Department of English, NTNU
Department of English, NTNU
Abstract
本文探討客語中兩個最重要的多意功能詞「分」與「摎」的語意延伸。雖然這兩個詞的原始意義毫無關聯，最終卻共同來承擔表達受惠者語意角色的任務，並展現分工合作。如同世界上許多其他語言一樣，客語也必須區分三種受惠者：即接受受惠者、代理受惠者，以及一般受惠者。「分」主要用來表達接受受惠者以及一般受惠者，而「摎」主要是用來表達代理受惠者以及一般受惠者。在特別的語境之下，「摎」亦可用來表達接受受惠者。然而，由於客語目的句式的雙事件結構的限制，「分」無法用來表達代理受惠者。「分」的語意延伸從接受者到接受受惠者，再到一般受惠者。「摎」的語意延伸從同事者到代理受惠者，再到一般受惠者。這兩個語意延伸的過程當中的階段可藉由「引發推論」(Traugott 1999, Traugott & Dasher 2002)來獲得合理的解釋。
This paper investigates semantic extensions of the two most significant polysemous function words in Hakka, bun and lau. Though totally unrelated in their original senses, together they came to express the beneficiary role and exhibit a division of labor. Like many other languages, Hakka distinguishes among three kinds of beneficiaries, i.e. recipient beneficiaries, deputative beneficiaries, and plain beneficiaries. Bun is used primarily to express recipient beneficiaries and plain beneficiaries, whereas lau is used primarily to express deputative beneficiaries and plain beneficiaries. Within appropriate contexts, lau can also express recipient beneficiaries. However, bun can never express deputative beneficiaries due to the bi-event structure of the purposive bun constructions in Hakka. The semantic extension of bun is from recipient to recipient beneficiary, and then to plain beneficiary. The semantic extension of lau is from comitative to deputative beneficiary, and then to plain beneficiary. The semantic extensions are justified by invited inferencing (Traugott 1999, Traugott & Dasher 2002) in each stage in the process.
This paper investigates semantic extensions of the two most significant polysemous function words in Hakka, bun and lau. Though totally unrelated in their original senses, together they came to express the beneficiary role and exhibit a division of labor. Like many other languages, Hakka distinguishes among three kinds of beneficiaries, i.e. recipient beneficiaries, deputative beneficiaries, and plain beneficiaries. Bun is used primarily to express recipient beneficiaries and plain beneficiaries, whereas lau is used primarily to express deputative beneficiaries and plain beneficiaries. Within appropriate contexts, lau can also express recipient beneficiaries. However, bun can never express deputative beneficiaries due to the bi-event structure of the purposive bun constructions in Hakka. The semantic extension of bun is from recipient to recipient beneficiary, and then to plain beneficiary. The semantic extension of lau is from comitative to deputative beneficiary, and then to plain beneficiary. The semantic extensions are justified by invited inferencing (Traugott 1999, Traugott & Dasher 2002) in each stage in the process.