從否定詞「不」 探討「又」、「再」之句法結構及意象基模

Abstract

關於現代漢語關聯副詞「又」和「再」的研究眾多，大致可分為探討其核心語義與語法結構兩大方面的研究。然而對於兩者同表「重複義」時的語義以及句法兩方面的分析，十分少見。因此本研究即聚焦於對於「又」、「再」同表「重複義」時的在句法及語義上的區別。 本文研究問題有三：（1）表「重複義」的「再」、「又」，分別在否定句與肯定句時可以/不可以和「了」共現的規律為何？（2）藉由1的研究結果，此時「又」和「再」句法及語義區別為何？（3.）藉由1、2，找出「再」、「又」與「了」共用時的教學應用為何？ 針對這三個問題，本文將「又」、「再」分為單句及複句進行分析。在單句分析上，著重在句法層面，配合Shen（2004）和Lin& Liu（2008）以漢語輕動詞的理論進行分析。Lin & Liu（2008）主張，「又」與句末助詞「了」共現，而「再」則否。本文認為此研究結論不夠完整，因為否定句的「不再」一定與「了」共現，而「不又」則不一定與「了」共現。本文主張，管轄句尾「了」的隱現是由句子的事件是動態/靜態而定。「不」因其詞綴化功能，配合中心語上昇（Head-raising）移動，使「不再」成為一個能引發動態輕動詞的新詞，因而與句尾「了」共現。並由「又」、「再」、「不又」、「不再」動態與靜態的特質，將分析擴及其與漢語五種事件分類間的互動。 在第四章的複句分析上，側重於語義的討論。筆者將承Jing-Schmidt & Gries（2009）對於漢語副詞「又」、「再」的「語義基模」（schematic meaning）研究，採用認知理論中「意象基模」（image schema）理論來解釋「又」、「再」連接「重複義」的先後事件上的功能區別。本文改良Jing-Schmidt & Gries（2009）的基模圖示後，發現「又」後承的事件功能在「強化原主題」，亦即事件雖有先後順序，但要強調的主題早在事件之前已出現。另一方面，「再」後接事件的功能在於「推展後續事件」，也就是後續將會產生新的變化。並可由此基模解釋何以「又再」組合常見、而「再又」組合基本是零的狀況。 教學方面，由單句出發，以學習者容易辨認的「了」進行肯定句時「又…了」共現規則。待學習者習得否定句後，介紹「不再…了」共現；複句教學時可配合意象基模解釋「又」、「再」的連結功能的差異。

This study deals with the Mandarin adverbs you(又) and zai(再), from a syntactical and semantic perspective, regarding their meaning ‘again’. The necessity for this study is in response to the lack of research regarding both you and zai concerning their ‘again’ meaning from a syntactic and semantic perspective. This research is comprised of two sections; one directly discusses their core meanings and the other discusses their structures. The three main research questions are as follows: 1) Pinpoint the underlying rule behind zai and you when referring to the meaning ‘again’. 2) Specify the semantic and syntactic differences between you and zai based on the findings of research question 1. 3) Reveal how the finding from research questions 1 and 2 can be applied to an actual teaching scenario. Sentences containing you and zai were divided into two groups: simple sentences and complex sentences (including compound sentences). For the analysis of simple sentences, this study focuses on their syntactic structure, based on the Light Verb Theory which follows the work of Shen (2004) and Lin& Liu (2009). This study demonstrates that the conclusion drawn from Lin & Liu’s (2009) findings is insufficient and requires further research that includes the negation bu(不). Specifically, the research must cover the rule regarding you not only as it appears with SFP le(了) but also buzai(不再) which, due to the cliticization of bu and Head-Raising movement in Mandarin, is intrinsically different. For the analysis of complex/compound sentences, this study investigates the differences between youand zai regarding their semantic functions when adjoining two sequential events and maintaining the meaning ‘again’. The theory of ‘Image schema’ was applied, based on the study of ‘schematic meaning’ concerning you and zai proposed by Jing-Schmidt& Gries（2009）. This study modifies the image schema from Jing-Schmidt & Gries’（2009）study and concludes that you is used to intensify the main topic, which precedes the connected event by referring back to it. Likewise, zai is used to propel the ensuing events, and a new change is expected after it. The rare occurance of zaiyou（再又） sentences in contrast to the more frequent youzai（又再） sentences also exemplifies the validity of the proposed image schema. As for teaching suggestions, this study suggests that instructors divide you and zai into two groups: simple sentences and complex sentences. For simple sentences, make sure learners are aware of the disappearance of the SFP le in sentences without bu. For complex sentences, the instructor may illustrate the differences between you and zai with their particular image schemas to help learners distinguish the subtle features more easily.