跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.233.217.106) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/17 11:31
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:林靜怡
研究生(外文):Bonnie Ching-yi Lin
論文名稱:國語量詞選擇的口語實驗
論文名稱(外文):A Production Experiment of Mandarin Classifier Selection
指導教授:謝國平謝國平引用關係
指導教授(外文):John Kwock-ping Tse
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:英語研究所
學門:人文學門
學類:外國語文學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:英文
論文頁數:85
中文關鍵詞:國語量詞
外文關鍵詞:classifierMandarin classifier
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:541
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:102
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:2
摘 要
中文的量詞系統(Chinese classifier system)長久以來都是語言學家很感興趣的話題。本研究特別著重在國語量詞在口語中的選擇情形。我們一共討論三個關於量詞選擇的潛在因素,分別是「量詞與名詞之間的語義關係」、「量詞出現所在的句法結構」以及「名詞物體外觀的變化」。
在本文的第一個部分裡,我們著重在數字之後的量詞選擇情況。實驗的結果顯示當量詞與它所修飾的名詞之間的語義關係十分接近時,此量詞的表現會保存的相當好。反之,當量詞與其修飾的名詞之間的語意關係較疏遠時,量詞則比較容易被中性化(即以個取代之)或由其它意思相近的量詞所取代。
這篇研究的第二部分則在討論指示詞(demonstratives)之後的量詞選擇情形。我們比較在數字之後及在指示詞之後的量詞其中性化程度的不同。結果顯示當量詞出現在指示詞之後時,較常被中性化,且此差異達到統計上的顯著差異。
最後一個部分所討論的是在量詞選擇的過程中,認知機制(conceptual mechanism)所扮演的角色。我們以相同的物體、不同的姿態(形狀、大小等外觀上的差異)來測試受試者的選擇是否會不同。結果並不如預期。受試者似乎並不受物體外觀的改變而影響到他們量詞的選擇,他們始終偏好選用自己詞彙中較偏好的量詞來修飾同一個物體(名詞)。換句話說,在選擇量詞的過程中,特定量詞與名詞之間連用頻率(collocation frequency)的高低似乎比物體外觀的形狀來得重要。

ABSTRACT
The Chinese classifier system has always been an intriguing and interesting topic under discussion. In this study, we focus on the classifier selection of Mandarin Chinese speakers. We discuss three potential factors underlying the Mandarin classifier selection─semantic relation between classifiers and the following nouns, the syntactic environment where classifiers occur, and physical traits of the target objects.
In the first part of the study, we specifically examine classifiers after numerals. The results indicate that when the semantic content of a particular classifier is close to the following noun, this classifier is more likely to be preserved. As the semantic relation between a noun and a classifier gets more distant, the classifier tends to be either neutralized to a general classifier ge or substituted to another specific classifier which has certain overlapping semantic feature with the original classifier.
The second part of this thesis deals with classifier selection after demonstratives. We compare the neutralization of classifiers after numerals (with the data we obtained in the first part of the study) and demonstratives. The result shows that classifiers occurring after demonstratives are neutralized more often than those after numerals, and the difference reaches statistic significance.
The last part of this research investigates the conceptual mechanism underlying classifier selection. With the change of physical traits of the same target objects, we expect subjects to react differently and choose different classifiers according to the most salient perceptual feature of the two pictures (of the same target object). However, the result is not as expected. Subjects seem not to be influenced by the change of shapes, sizes, etc., they nevertheless tend to choose the classifier in their lexicon that collocates with a particular noun most frequently. That is, collocation frequency seems to play a bigger role than conception in classifier selection.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………….i
CHINESE ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………ii
ENGLISH ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………….iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………….v
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES…………………………………………………vii
Chapter One Introduction…………………………………………………….1
1.1 Motivation……………………………………………………………………1
1.2 Goals and Methodology……………………………………………………...2
1.3 Organization of the Study……………………………………………………4
Chapter Two Review of Literature……………………………………………6
2.1 The Development of Mandarin Classifier Historically………………………6
2.2 Noun Classification in Chinese─a Cognitive Approach…………………….8
2.2.1 Animacy………………………………………………………………….8
2.2.2 Shape……………………………………………………………………..9
2.2.3 Size………………………………………………………………………11
2.2.4 Consistency…………………………………………………………...…11
2.2.5 Attributes referring to parts of objects…………………………………..11
2.3 The Mandarin Chinese Classifier System……………………………………12
2.4 Classifiers vs. Measure Words……………………………………………….13
2.5 Classifier Selection in Speech………………………………………………..16
2.6 Investigation on the Semantic Content of the General Classifier “ge”………18
Chapter Three Methodology………………………………………….……….22
3.1 Subjects………………………………………………………………………23
3.2 Elicitation Materials………………………………………………………….24
3.3 Procedure…………………………………………………………………….25
3.3.1 The Conduction of Experiment 1 and 3…………………………………28
3.3.2 The Conduction of Experiment 2………………………………………..29
3.4 Data Measurement and Analysis……………………………………………..30
Chapter Four Results and Findings…………………………………………….33
4.1 Experiment 1-Classifier Selection in “Numeral+CL+Noun”………………33
4.1.1 Classifier Production of Zhang(張)……………………………………...33
4.1.2 Classifier Production of Tiao(條)………………………………………..36
4.1.3 Classifier Production of Ba(把)………………………………………..39
4.1.4 Classifier Production of Zhi(枝)……………………………………….41
4.1.5 Classifier Production of Gen(根)………………………………………43
4.1.6 Classifier Production of Duo(朵)………………………………………45
4.1.7 Classifier Production of Zhi(隻)……………………………………….45
4.1.8 Other Less Frequent Classifiers………………………………………..46
4.2 Experiment 2-Classifier Selection in “Demonstrative+CL+Noun”………48
4.3 Experiment 3-Classifier Selection with the Change of Physical Traits…..54
Chapter Five General Discussion……………………………………………57
5.1 Classifier Selection Concerning ‘ge’ (個)…………………………………..57
5.2 The Neutralization of Less-frequently Used Classifiers……………………61
5.3 Classifier Selection After Demonstratives………………………………….63
5.4 Conceptual Mechanism in Classifier Selection………………….………….64
Chapter Six Conclusion……………………………………………….……..66
6.1 Summary of Previous Chapters…………………………………………….66
6.2 Implications………………………………………………...………………68
6.3 Limitation and Suggestions for Further Investigation………………….…..69
Appendix A A List of Elicitation Materials…………..………………………..72
References…………………………………………………………………………80
References
Ahrens, Kathleen. 1994. Classifier production in normals and aphasics. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 22:203-247.
____, and Chu-Ren Huang. 1996. Classifier and semantic type coercion: Motivating a new classification of classifiers. Language, Information, and Computation (PACLIC 11): 1-10.
Aikhenvald, A. Y. 2000. Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford University Press.
Allen, Keith. 1977. Classifiers. Language 53:285-311.
Biq, Yung-O. 2000. Classifier and construction: The interaction of grammatical categories and cognitive strategies. Proceedings of the 7th meeting of the International Symposium on Chinese Language and Linguistics, Chiayi, December 22-24.
Broschart, Jurgen. 2000. Isolation of units and unification of isolates: the gestalt-functions of classifiers. In Senft, (ed.) (2000), 239-169.
Chang-Smith, Meiyun. 2000. Empirical evidence for prototypes in linguistic categorization revealed in Mandarin numeral classifiers. Journal of Chinese Language Teachers Association 35.2:19-52.
Chao, Yuen Ren. 1968. A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Chen, Mei-chih and Liang-hsow Chen, 2000. The interaction of perception, concept, and language. 航空技術學校學報 2.1:211-218.
____. 1996. The function of noun classifiers in Chinese written discourse. 國立中正大學學報人文分冊 7.1:399-411.
Chen, Rong-an. 1999. The semantics of Chinese classifiers: a historical perspective (中文量詞的語意與古今用法之對比). The Crane Publishing Company.
程祥徽, 田小琳. 1992. 現代漢語. Bookman Books LTD.
Cheng, Lisa L.S. and Rint Sybesma. 1998. Yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: classifiers and massifiers. The Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies, New Series. 28.3:385-412.
Cheung, Hintat and Janice Fon. 2002. The Construction of Classifier System in Mandarin Chinese. Proceedings of the 1st Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Taipei, January 12-13.
Clark, Herbert H. and Eve V. Clark, 1977. Psychology and language: An introduction to psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Craig, Colette, (ed.) 1986. Noun classes and categorization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Denny, J. Peter. 1986. The semantics role of noun classifiers. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 297-308.
Dirven, Rene and Marjolijn Verspoor (eds.). 1998. Cognitive exploration of language and linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Dixon, R. M. W. 1986. Noun classes and noun classification in typological perspective. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 105-112.
Erbaugh, Mary S. 1986. Taking stock: the development of Chinese noun classifiers historically and in young children. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 399-436.
Grinevald, Colette. 2000. A morphosyntactic typology of classifiers. In Senft, (ed.) (2000), 50-92.
謝麗雪. 1995. An analysis of Chinese classifiers used in a translation task. 華岡英語學報 1:17-36.
____. 1996. Comparing the Chinese lexeme “pian” with “kuai”. 華岡英語學報 2:103-115.
關湘. 2000. 量詞的探研. 中國語文通訊 55:54-59.
Lakoff, George. 1986. Classifiers as a reflection of mind. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 13-52.
____. 1987. Woman, fire and dangerous things: what categories reveal about mind. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lee, Chingkwei Adrienne. 2000. Chinese classifier tiao revisited: a cognitive linguistics study. 文史學報 30:147-186.
Li, Audrey Yen-hui. 2001. Universal constructions?─Relativization in English and Chinese. Concentric: Studies in English Literature and Linguistics. 27:2 81-102.
Li, Charles and Sandra Thompson. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: a functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Li, Cherry Ing, and Leslie Fu-mei Wang. 2002. Conceptual Mapping and Functional Shift: The Case of Taiwan Min Cit-e. Proceedings of the 1st Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Taipei, January 12-13.
Li, Wendan. 2000. The pragmatic function of numeral-classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 32:1113-1133.
林煌賄, 顏玉升. 2000. Language change: a case study on the meaning change of the Chinese classifier ge. 和春學報 7:424-446.
劉小梅. 1994. 華語動詞組內數量詞的使用及語意. 華文世界 73:33-37.
Loke, Kit-ken. 1994. Is ge merely a ‘general classifier’? Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 29:35-50.
____. 1996 Norms and realities of Mandarin shape classifiers. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 31:1-22.
____. 1997. The grammaticalization and regrammaticalization of Chinese numeral classifier morphemes. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 25.1:1-20.
Lucy, John A. 2000. Systems of nominal classification: a concluding discussion. In Senft, (ed.) (2000), 326-341.
Mithun, Marianne. 1986. The convergence of noun classification systems. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 13-52.
Myers, James. 2000. Rules and analogy in Mandarin classifier selection. Language and Linguistics 1(2).
____, and Tsay Jane. 2000. The Acquisition of the Default Classifier in Taiwanese. Proceedings of the 7th meeting of the International Symposium on Chinese Language and Linguistics, Chiayi, December 22-24.
____, and Tsay Jane. 2002. Grammar and Cognition in Sinitic Noun Classifier Systems. Proceedings of the 1st Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Taipei, January 12-13.
Posner, Michael. 1986. Empirical studies of prototypes. In Craig, (ed.) (1986), 53-61.
Senft, Gunter, (ed.) 2000. Systems of nominal classification. Cambridge University Press.
____. 2000. What do we really know about nominal classification systems? In Senft, (ed.) (2000), 11-49.
Shi, Yu-zhi. 1996. Proportion and extensional dimensions: The primary cognitive basis for shape-based classifiers in Chinese. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association 31:37-59.
Simpson, Andrew. 2001. Definiteness agreement and the Chinese DP. 語言暨語言學 2:1 125-156.
Tai, James H-Y. 1992. Variation in classifier systems across Chinese dialects: Towards a cognition-based semantic approach. Chinese Languages and Linguistics I: Chinese Dialects, 587-608. Symposium Series of the Institute of History and Philology No. 2. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
____. 1994. Chinese classifier systems and human categorization. In honor of William S.-Y. Wang: Interdisciplinary Studies on Language and Language Change, ed. by M.Y. Chen and O. Tzeng, 479-495. Taipei: Pyramid Press.
____, and F.-Y. Chao. 1994. A semantic study of the classifier zhang. Journal of Chinese Language Teachers Association 29:67-78.
____, and L. Wang. 1990. A semantic study of the classifier tiao (條). Journal of Chinese Language Teachers Association 25:35-56.
Taylor, Insup and M. M. Taylor, 1990. Psycholinguistics: Learning and using language. Englewood, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Tomasello, Michael (ed.). 1998. The new psychology of language: cognitive and functional approaches to language structure. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.
Truscott, John. 2000. The unity of nominal linking devices. Proceedings of the National Science Council. 10.1:142-455.
Tzeng, Ovid, Sylvia Chen, and Daisy L. Hung. 1991. The classifier problem in Chinese Aphasia. Brain and Language 41:184-202.
Ungerer, F. and H.J. Schmid. 1996. An introduction to cognitive linguistics. London: Longman.
Wang, Fu-mei, 2001. Classifiers in Taiwan Min. MA Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.
Wiebusch, Thekla. 1995. Quantification and qualification: Two competing functions of numeral classifiers in the light of radical system of the Chinese script. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 23:1-41.
Yau, Shun-chiu, 1988. A cognitive approach to the genesis of nominal classifiers as observed in archaic Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 16.2: 264-277.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top