臺陸日三地小學教科書漢字比較研究

Abstract

本論文以「臺灣小學國語文教材」之正體漢字為研究基本材料，並以「中國大陸小學國語文教材」教學用字與「日本小學國語文教材」教育漢字為研究對照，透過彙整比較三地教材所列超過三千字的教學基礎漢字，探討其字形、讀音與教學量的異同，並分析臺灣､中國大陸､日本漢字教材存在字形、音讀、教學量及文化選字上的系統性差異，整合通用漢字範圍與可能的教育應用。本文依據「字形相同與否」與「音讀接近與否」進行類別劃分，歸納出「無法通用」、「部分通用」與「可通用」三種漢字類型；研究結果顯示：無法通用漢字包含51相異字與1519字未對應之教育漢字，部分通用漢字為281字，可通用漢字有474字；其餘因字形簡化或未列入當地課綱，亦屬無法通用漢字。本研究以實證角度建構臺灣､中國大陸､日本小學通用漢字範疇，除建立初步通用漢字表之外，亦針對字形混淆、詞義差異與教學策略提出具體建議，期望提供作為國際漢語教學、跨國漢字課綱設計與教材編輯的參考，為未來推動「共通基礎漢字表」奠定理論基礎，並回應當代語文教育與文化互通的需求。

This paper uses the traditional Chinese characters in"Taiwanese elementary Chinese language textbooks" as the basic research material, and uses the teaching characters in "Chinese mainland elementary Chinese language textbooks" and the educational Chinese characters in "Japanese elementary Chinese language textbooks" as the research comparison. By summarizing and comparing the teaching basic Chinese characters listed in the textbooks of the three places, more than 3,000 characters are discussed to explore the similarities and differences in theircharacter shapes, pronunciations, and teaching amounts. It also analyzes the systematic differences in character shapes, pronunciations, teaching amounts, and cultural character selection in the Chinese character textbooks of Taiwan, mainland China, and Japan, and integrates the scope of common Chinese characters and possible educational applications.This paper classifies characters based on"whether the character shapes are the same" and "whether the pronunciations are similar", and summarizes three types of Chinese characters: "non-universal", "partially universal", and "universal". The research results show that non-universal Chinese characters include 51 different characters and 1,519 educational characters that do not correspond to characters, 281 partially universal characters, and 474 universal characters; the rest are also non-universal Chinese characters because their character shapes are simplified or not included in the local curriculum.This study constructs the scope of common Chinese characters in elementary schools in Taiwan, mainland China, and Japan from an empirical perspective. In addition to establishing a preliminary common Chinese character table, it also proposes specific suggestions for character confusion, word meaning differences, and teaching strategies. It is hoped that it will provide a reference for international Chinese teaching, cross-national Chinese character curriculum design, and textbook editing, lay a theoretical foundation for the future promotion of the"common basic Chinese character table", and respond to the needs of contemporary language education and cultural communication.