漢語情態動詞「能」與「可以」的多角度辨析

Abstract

漢語情態動詞「能」與「可以」皆為多義詞，且互相近義的現象極為複雜，許多研究皆分析過兩詞差異，但不同研究所應用的理論架構亦不相同，故至今未有整體性的結論。 沿襲前人的成果，本研究以核心語義、共現詞彙、句法特徵及語義概念圖等 角度探看「能」與「可以」個別的多義現象，再進一步釐清兩詞間重合的語義用 法為何，具有區別性不可混用的語義用法為何，並列出兩詞的關鍵差異。 在核心語義角度，本研究以 Ahrens 等人（1998）的理論框架搭配中央研究 院的多個語料庫探求「能」與「可以」於歷時發展中形成的核心語義及各個義面， 並檢視「能」與「可以」與反義副詞「才」、「就」和「只」與「還」的共現分布； 在句法特徵角度，本研究探究兩詞作為漢語情態動詞共有的句法特徵，也以不同 句式檢驗兩詞的相異之處；在語義概念圖角度，本研究探討兩詞的語義概念網絡， 以及這些語義延伸的路徑。 根據研究結果，「能」與「可以」在三個角度下都具有一定的對立性（contrast）。 在核心語義角度，兩詞僅本質能力允許及外部條件允許這兩個語義可以互換，且 「能」與「可以」與兩組反義副詞的共現分布亦截然相反，「能」傾向與「才」、 「只」共現，「可以」則傾向與「就」、「還」共現；在句法特徵角度，兩詞在對話 問答及移位能力的表現也十分不同；在語義概念圖中，「能」與「可以」各有獨立 的語義延伸路徑，僅有本質能力允許與外部條件允許兩區塊是重合的。透過多角 度的辨析，本研究發現「能」與「可以」間既近義又具有區別的現象支持語言學 理論中的對立說（Clark, 1987；Clark 1992），即 Bolinger (1977) 所提出的概念「一 個意思對應一個形式，而一個形式對應一個意思」。Although considerable research attempted to account for the complexity ofChinese modal verbs néng and kěyǐ, little consensus has been reached upon thedifference between these two polysemous words. Grounded by the previous research, the present study aims to entangle thepolysemy of and overlapping in meaning between néng and kěyǐ in a multi-perspective framework, and further explores the uniqueness in the two words. The four perspectives include core-meaning, syntactic feature, semantic map, and collocational analysis.In the perspective of core meaning, the present study opts the theoreticalframewok of Ahren et al. (1998) to inspect the core meaning and individual meaning facets of néng and kěyǐ as well as using Sinica Corpus and Chinese Gigaword Corpus to analyze the collocational distribution of néng and kěyǐ with antonymous adverbial pairs [cái, jiù] and [zhǐ, hái]. In the perspective of syntactic feature, the commonfeatures of Chinese modal verbs and diffferent syntactic constrructions are put into the inspection of néng and kěyǐ. In the perspective of semantic map, the present study examines the semantic network of néng and kěyǐ and how it forms distinctive extensions. This finding of the study suggests that néng and kěyǐ manifest a certain extent of constrast in the four perspcetives. In terms of core meaning, the only interchangeable meanings in the two words are “intrinsic enablement” and “extrinsic enablement”. In addition, the two modal verbs associate with different members in the antonymous adverbial pairs. Néng tends to collocate with cái and zhǐ while kěyǐ tends to pair up with jiù and hái. Regarding the syntactic feature, néng and kěyǐ differ significantly when employed in a conversation. The mobility of which in a sentence also shows obvious distinction. In terms of semantic map, the two words have independent semantic extentions, and only overlap in the chunk of “intrinsic enablement” and “extrinsic enablement”. Through the lens of the multi-perspective analysis, the present study discovered that, in spite of the partial near-synonymous feature, néng and kěyǐ still possess individual characteristics that distinguish them from one another. This phenomenon also supports the concept of language contrast (Calrk, 1987; Clark 1992), as Bolinger (1977) has proposed ⸻⸻⸻“one meaning for one form, and one form for one meaning”.