【摘要】：布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)是漢藏語(yǔ)系中名量詞比較豐富的語(yǔ)言。由于漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)法理論的影響,人們一般都是從漢語(yǔ)的角度來(lái)認(rèn)識(shí)布依語(yǔ)名量詞的,無(wú)論是名量詞的分類、名量詞的性質(zhì)、名量詞的語(yǔ)法功能,都認(rèn)為跟漢語(yǔ)一樣。事實(shí)上,布依語(yǔ)名量詞在各個(gè)方面都表現(xiàn)出與漢語(yǔ)不同的特點(diǎn)。因此,本文根據(jù)認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論、結(jié)構(gòu)主義理論和語(yǔ)法化理論從不同的角度對(duì)布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)的名量詞進(jìn)行對(duì)比研究,分析了兩者名量詞產(chǎn)生的語(yǔ)義基礎(chǔ),描寫(xiě)了它們不同的語(yǔ)法功能和語(yǔ)法特點(diǎn),揭示兩種語(yǔ)言名量詞的發(fā)展和演化過(guò)程,并對(duì)它們的差異進(jìn)行解釋。 布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞的對(duì)比研究過(guò)去很少有人涉足,而且多從傳統(tǒng)語(yǔ)法的角度比較兩者的異同,結(jié)果往往是同多異少,不能真正顯示布依語(yǔ)名量詞的特點(diǎn)。因此本文試圖從新的角度揭示布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞的特點(diǎn),突顯兩者的差異,力求在以往研究的基礎(chǔ)上有所突破。為此,本文利用第一手調(diào)查的布依語(yǔ)名量詞材料與漢語(yǔ)名量詞進(jìn)行比較,擬實(shí)現(xiàn)以下四個(gè)目標(biāo)：第一,探索運(yùn)用新的語(yǔ)言學(xué)理論和方法來(lái)研究布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)語(yǔ)法,特別是布依語(yǔ)語(yǔ)法；第二,揭示布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞產(chǎn)生的語(yǔ)義基礎(chǔ),加深對(duì)兩種語(yǔ)言特點(diǎn)的認(rèn)識(shí)；第三,對(duì)布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞的傳統(tǒng)分類重新進(jìn)行界定；第四,從歷時(shí)的角度描寫(xiě)布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展的過(guò)程,并對(duì)布依語(yǔ)名量詞的來(lái)源進(jìn)行合理的解釋。 論文正文分為五章,另外有緒論和結(jié)語(yǔ)兩個(gè)部分。具體內(nèi)容是： 第一章布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞概述。主要介紹布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞研究的大體概況,并對(duì)布依語(yǔ)名量詞在日常生活中的分布情況進(jìn)行詳細(xì)的說(shuō)明。 第二章布依語(yǔ)漢語(yǔ)名量詞的語(yǔ)義基礎(chǔ)對(duì)比。本章描寫(xiě)和分析了布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)中的事物范疇、基本層次范疇、范疇化的原則和手段以及事物的“量”,發(fā)現(xiàn)兩種語(yǔ)言由于所處的地理環(huán)境不同,因而對(duì)事物的認(rèn)知存在一定的差異,這是造成兩者名量詞功能不同的語(yǔ)義基礎(chǔ)。最后運(yùn)用原型理論分析和對(duì)比了兩種語(yǔ)言名量詞在原型、中心成員和邊緣成員等方面表現(xiàn)出來(lái)的不同特點(diǎn),揭示了名量詞的屬性是決定名量詞范疇成員地位的基礎(chǔ)。 第三章布依語(yǔ)漢語(yǔ)名量詞的分類對(duì)比。長(zhǎng)期以來(lái),布依語(yǔ)名量詞的分類是根據(jù)漢語(yǔ)名量詞分類的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來(lái)進(jìn)行的,這不僅不符合實(shí)際,而且模糊了兩種語(yǔ)言名量詞的界限。根據(jù)布依語(yǔ)名量詞“別類”的性質(zhì),本文把布依語(yǔ)名量詞分為有生量詞和無(wú)生量詞兩大類；同時(shí)根據(jù)漢語(yǔ)名量詞的“形狀”屬性,把名量詞分為“相同形狀”、“相似形狀”和“模糊形狀”三個(gè)類型。 第四章布依語(yǔ)漢語(yǔ)名量詞的語(yǔ)法功能對(duì)比。在詞法功能上,布依語(yǔ)名量詞的別類功能和情感功能比較明顯,而漢語(yǔ)名量詞在區(qū)別詞義和區(qū)分同音詞方面作用較為突出；在句法功能上,布依語(yǔ)名量詞能夠跟數(shù)詞、指示代詞、形容詞、方位詞和動(dòng)詞等發(fā)生組合關(guān)系,而漢語(yǔ)的名量詞只能跟數(shù)詞和指示代詞進(jìn)行組合；而且在充當(dāng)句法成分的能力上,布依語(yǔ)的名量詞比漢語(yǔ)的名量詞明顯要強(qiáng)得多。 第五章布依語(yǔ)漢語(yǔ)名量詞的語(yǔ)法化對(duì)比。通過(guò)對(duì)名量詞語(yǔ)法化的動(dòng)因、語(yǔ)法化的機(jī)制和語(yǔ)法化的路徑等方面的分析和對(duì)比,本文認(rèn)為漢語(yǔ)名量詞在中古后期就走向成熟,并建立了數(shù)量表達(dá)的優(yōu)勢(shì)結(jié)構(gòu)“數(shù)+量+名”。這直接影響并導(dǎo)致布依語(yǔ)名量詞的產(chǎn)生,其過(guò)程包括三個(gè)方面：首先,一部分名量詞直接從漢語(yǔ)借用；其次,布依語(yǔ)的名詞詞頭通過(guò)重新分析演化為名量詞,再次,布依語(yǔ)中有些名詞和動(dòng)詞通過(guò)類推也向名量詞轉(zhuǎn)化。除了以上幾方面的差異,布依語(yǔ)和漢語(yǔ)名量詞的語(yǔ)義演變也表現(xiàn)出不同的傾向。 緒論部分主要對(duì)本文研究的動(dòng)機(jī)和目的進(jìn)行說(shuō)明,并詳細(xì)介紹了研究方法、理論基礎(chǔ)以及研究的材料和范圍。結(jié)語(yǔ)部分總結(jié)了全文的主要觀點(diǎn),指出了研究過(guò)程中存在的不足之處,并對(duì)未來(lái)的研究提出了展望。
[Abstract]:Buyi and Chinese are a very rich language in the Chinese and Tibetan Languages. Because of the influence of the Chinese grammar theory, people generally know the quantifier of the Buyi language from the angle of Chinese, whether it is the classification of the quantifier, the nature of the noun quantifier, the grammatical function of the noun classifier. In fact, the quantifier of the name of the Buyi language is in each of the languages. According to the cognitive linguistics theory, the structuralism theory and the grammaticalization theory, this paper makes a contrastive study of the noun quantifiers in Buyi and Chinese from different angles, and analyzes the semantic basis of their noun quantifiers, describing their different grammatical functions and grammatical features, and revealing their different grammatical and grammatical features. The development and evolution of two kinds of Noun Classifiers are explained and their differences are explained.
The comparative study of Buyi and Chinese noun quantifiers in the past few people have been involved in the past, and compare the similarities and differences of the two from the traditional grammar point of view. The results often result in the same number of differences, which can not really show the characteristics of the quantifier of the Buyi name. In order to make a breakthrough on the basis of previous studies, this paper makes use of the first hand survey of Buyi quantifier materials and Chinese noun quantifiers to achieve the following four goals: first, to explore the use of new linguistic theories and methods to study Buyi and Chinese grammar, especially Buyi grammar; second, to reveal Buyi language. And the semantic basis produced by the Chinese noun quantifier, deepen the understanding of the two language characteristics; third, redefine the traditional classification of Buyi and Chinese noun quantifiers; fourth, describe the process of the generation and development of Buyi and Chinese noun quantifiers from the diachronic angle, and make a reasonable explanation of the source of the quantifier of the Buyi language.
The main body of the thesis is divided into five chapters. Besides, there are two parts: introduction and conclusion.
The first chapter is the outline of Buyi and Chinese noun quantifiers. It mainly introduces the general survey of the study of Buyi and Chinese noun quantifiers, and gives a detailed description of the distribution of Buyi quantifiers in daily life.
The second chapter compares the semantic basis of the Chinese noun quantifier in Buyi language. This chapter describes and analyzes the category of things in Buyi and Chinese, the basic level category, the principle and means of categorization, and the "quantity" of the things, and finds that there are some differences in the cognition of the two languages because of their different geographical environment. This is the result of this. In the end, the different characteristics of the two language name quantifiers in the archetype, the central members and the marginal members are analyzed and contrasted with the prototype theory. It is revealed that the attribute of the noun quantifier is the basis for determining the status of the category of the name quantifier.
The third chapter is the classification and comparison of the quantifier of Chinese name in Buyi language. For a long time, the classification of the quantifier of the name of Buyi is carried out according to the standard of classifiers in Chinese names. This is not only inconsistent with the reality, but also blurs the boundaries of the quantifiers of the two languages. According to the nature of the "different category" of the Buyi name quantifier, this paper divides the Buyi quantifier into a living language. According to the "shape" attribute of the Chinese noun quantifier, the quantifier is divided into three types: "the same shape", "similar shape" and "fuzzy shape", according to the "shape" attribute of the Chinese noun quantifier.
The fourth chapter is the grammatical function comparison of the Chinese noun quantifier in Buyi language. In the lexical function, the function and the emotional function of the Buyi quantifier are more obvious, while the Chinese noun quantifier plays a more prominent role in distinguishing the word meaning and distinguishing the homonym; in the syntactic function, the Buyi name words can follow the numerals, indicating the pronouns, adjectives, and azimuth words. There is a combination of verbs and other verbs, while the Chinese noun quantifier can only be combined with the numerals and demonstrative pronouns, and in the ability to act as a syntactic component, the noun quantifier of the Buyi language is much stronger than the Chinese noun quantifier.
The fifth chapter compares the grammaticalization of the Chinese noun quantifier in Buyi language. Through the analysis and comparison of the motivation, the grammaticalization mechanism and the grammaticalization path of the noun words, this paper holds that the Chinese noun quantifier is mature in the middle of the middle of the middle of the middle of the middle age, and has established the dominant structure of quantity expression, "number + quantity + name", which directly affects and causes the cloth. According to the production of a noun classifier, the process consists of three aspects: first, a part of the noun classifier is borrowed directly from the Chinese language; secondly, the noun phrase of the Buyi language is transformed into a noun quantifier through reanalysis, and again, some nouns and verbs in Buyi are converted to the noun quantifier through analogies. The semantic evolution of quantifiers also shows different tendencies.
The introduction part mainly explains the motive and purpose of this study, and introduces the research method, the theoretical basis and the material and scope of the study in detail. The concluding part summarizes the main views of the full text, points out the shortcomings of the research process, and puts forward the prospect of the research in the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中央民族大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：H268;H146

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 金福芬,陳國(guó)華;漢語(yǔ)量詞的語(yǔ)法化[J];清華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年S1期

2 吳安其;;漢藏語(yǔ)的數(shù)詞[J];民族語(yǔ)文;2006年02期

3 游汝杰;;論臺(tái)語(yǔ)量詞在漢語(yǔ)南方方言中的底層遺存[J];民族語(yǔ)文;1982年02期

4 吳福祥;近年來(lái)語(yǔ)法化研究的進(jìn)展[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;2004年01期

5 吳啟祿;布依語(yǔ)量詞概略[J];貴州民族研究;1983年03期

6 戴慶廈,蔣穎;論藏緬語(yǔ)的反響型名量詞[J];中央民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2005年02期

7 李宇明;空間在世界認(rèn)知中的地位——語(yǔ)言與認(rèn)知關(guān)系的考察[J];湖北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1999年03期

8 梁敏;;壯侗語(yǔ)族量詞的產(chǎn)生和發(fā)展[J];民族語(yǔ)文;1983年03期

9 沈家煊;“語(yǔ)法化”研究綜觀[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;1994年04期

10 沈家煊;語(yǔ)言的“主觀性”和“主觀化”[J];外語(yǔ)教學(xué)與研究;2001年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 周芍;名詞量詞組合的雙向選擇研究及其認(rèn)知解釋[D];暨南大學(xué);2006年

2 樊中元;現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)一名多量現(xiàn)象研究[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2003年

3 葉桂郴;《六十種曲》和明代文獻(xiàn)的量詞[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2005年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 郭敏;基于認(rèn)知語(yǔ)言學(xué)的現(xiàn)代漢語(yǔ)形狀量詞詞義考察[D];北京語(yǔ)言大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2140821