(3.238.173.209) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/12 13:17
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:何尉賢
研究生(外文):Wei-Hsien He
論文名稱:從認知觀點看馬來語-nya的副詞功能
論文名稱(外文):The Adverbial Function of –nya in Bahasa Melayu: A Cognitive Perspective
指導教授:呂佳蓉呂佳蓉引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chia-Rung Lu
口試委員:黃宣範鍾曉芳
口試委員(外文):Shuan-Fan HuangSiaw-Fong Chung
口試日期:2013-06-18
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣大學
系所名稱:語言學研究所
學門:人文學門
學類:語言學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:英文
論文頁數:123
中文關鍵詞:語言學馬來語認知語法副詞形容詞
外文關鍵詞:linguisticsMalay languagecognitive grammaradverbialspronouns
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:260
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
馬來語言的附著型第三人稱代名詞 -nya,有多樣的功能: 可以是句子裡的論元,可以標示所屬關係,可以表達定指狀態,也可以引介副詞。在這些功能中,要屬直觀上難以理解的副詞功能,最引人興趣。本論文企圖完整討論此一議題,尤其著重認知機制和概念結構這兩個層面,看它們在 -nya的副詞功能中扮演的角色。從語料來看,大多數 –nya 的副詞功能,都具有句首出現的 (se-)X=nya 形式。這種表現,令人想到「主題-評論」的結構,-nya 在此結構中引介作為背景的訊息,並為之後的評論展開鋪陳。也就是說,-nya 副詞功能的基本架構,就是「主題-評論」的結構,並且在運作上,由代名詞本身帶有的認知機制所驅動。關於認知機制,作為一個所有格代名詞,-nya 具有前指性以及所屬關係標示的性質,這兩個特性讓副詞功能得以生成。首先,前指性有助於錨定訊息的參考基準,讓之後的副詞修飾有所依據。其次,所屬關係和名物化有關,名物化可將抽象關係,賦形為概念上可搬弄的實體,因此讓副詞修飾的尺度擴大,從單純的名詞,跨越到子句的層次。最後,隨著功能不斷發展,可以發現 –nya 的語義逐漸蒸散、慢慢變成表示強調的語氣助詞。這種現象,在 adanya 「有」和 bukannya 「並不是」這兩個實例中,最為明顯。

The clitic third person pronoun –nya in Bahasa Melayu is functionally versatile. It serves as a sentence argument, marks for possession, indicates definiteness, and introduces adverbials. Among these functions, the adverbial use is of particular interest, because it cannot be easily accounted for. The thesis aims to thoroughly address this issue, especially in terms of cognitive mechanism and conceptual structure underlying the adverbial function of –nya. Based on data observation, it is found that the adverbial –nya expression tends to take a clause-initial (se-)X=nya form. The expression suggests a topic-comment structure in which –nya introduces the back-grounded information and prepares for the following comment. This is the fundamental schema for the adverbial function, and its operation is energized by the cognitive mechanisms inherent in the pronominal basis of –nya. As a genitive pronoun, -nya has the properties of anaphoricity and possessive marking. These two properties contribute to the development of the adverbial function. First, anaphoricity helps anchor the referential ground on which adverbial modification is made. Second, possession leads to nominalization, which reifies relations into maneuverable conceptual entities and extend the scope of modification from nominal to clausal, as generally adverbs do. On the edge of this functional extension, it is also observed that –nya is becoming a semantically empty particle for emphasis, which is especially clear in cases like adanya ‘there is/are’ and bukannya ‘and it is not that … ’

Acknowledgement ii
English Abastract iii
Chinese Abstract iv
Table of Contents v
List of Tables vii
List of Figures viii
List of Abbreviations ix

Chapter 1 1
1.1 Motivation and Research Question 1
1.2 Methodology 6
1.2.1 The Term Bahasa Melayu 6
1.2.2 Basic Information of the Data 7
1.2.3 Glossing, Grammatical Terminologies, and Abbreviations 8
1.3 Organization 8
Chapter 2 10
2.1 A Sketch of the Malay Language 10
2.1.1 Classification and History 10
2.1.2 Grammatical Issues Relevant to –nya 13
2.2 Descriptions for the Functions of –nya 16
2.2.1 Tatabahasa Dewan on Standard Bahasa Malaysia 18
2.2.2 Sneddon on Standard Bahasa Indonesian 19
2.2.3 Englebretson on Colloquial Bahasa Indonesian 27
2.2.4 Yap on Colloquial Bahasa Malaysia 36
2.3 Summary 40
Chapter 3 43
3.1 Demonstrative Origin 43
3.1.1 The Demonstrative Origin of -nya 43
3.1.2 Characteristics of Demonstratives 47
3.2 Pronominal Properties 49
3.2.1 Defining Pronouns 49
3.2.2 Grounding 50
3.3 Possession and Nominalization 60
3.3.1 Possession as A Fundamental Concept 60
3.3.2 Parts of Speech in Light of Cognitive Linguistics 62
3.3.3 How Is se-X=nya Explained in the Localist Interpretation? 64
3.3.4 Summary 67
3.4 Syntactic Position 69
3.5 Joint discussion 72
Chapter 4 76
4.1 The Case Study of adanya 76
4.1.1 The Meanings and Uses of ada 77
4.1.2 -nya Becoming A Particle for Emphasis 79
4.1.3 Summary 85
4.2 The Case Study of bukannya 87
4.2.1 Malay Negators: bukan and tidak 87
4.2.2 bukan and bukannya 98
4.2.3 Summary 103
4.3 Joint Discussion 103
Chapter 5 105
References 112
Appendix 117


Adelaar, Alexander. (2004). Where does Malay come from? Twenty years of discussions about homeland, migrations and classifications. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde, 160, 1-30.
Adelaar, Alexander. (2005). A historical perspective. In Alexander Adeelar and
Nicholaus P. Himmelmann (Eds.), The Austronesian languages in Asia and Madagascar (pp. 1-42). Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press.
Andaya, Leonard Y. (2001). The search of the ‘origins’ of Melayu. Journal of
Southeast Asian Studies, 32, 315-330.
Bellwood, Peter, James J. Fox, and Darrell Tryon. (2006). The Austronesians:
Historical and comparative perspectives. Canberra: Australian National University Press.
Bhat, D.N.S. (2004). Pronouns. New York: Oxford University Press.
Blust, Robert. (1999). Subgrouping, circularity and extinction: Some issues in
Austronesian comparative linguistics. In E. Zeitoun and P.J.-K. Li (Eds.), Selected papers from the Eighth International Conference on Austronesian Linguistics (pp. 31-94). Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Blust, Robert. (2009). The Austronesian languages. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Bybee, Joan. (2002). Main clauses are innovative, subordinate clauses are
conservative: Consequences for the nature of constructions. In Joan Bybee and Michael Noonan (Eds.), Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in honor of Sandra A. Thompson (pp. 1-17). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Chafe, Wallace L. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and
displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chang, Henry Y. (2009). Adverbial verbs and adverbial compounds in Tsou: A
syntactic analysis. Oceanic Linguistics, 48, 439-476.
Cinque, Guglielmo. (1999). Adverbs and functional heads. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Croft, William. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in
typological perspective. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Croft, William. (2003). Typology and universals. 2nd ed. Cambridge; New York:
Cambrdige University Press.
Crystal, David. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. 6th ed.
Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing.
Department of Linguistics, Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
(2008). The Leipzig glossing rules: Conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses.
Diessel, Holger. (1999). Demonstratives: Form, function, and grammaticalization.
Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Dixon, R.M.W. (2010). Basic linguistic theory. Vol.2. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Du Bois, John W. and Sandra A. Thompson. (1991). Dimensions of a theory of
information flow. Massachusetts: University of California Santa Barbara.
Englebretson, Robert. (2003). Searching for structure: The problem of
complementation in colloquial Indonesian conversation. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Finney, Joseph C. (2007). Toward reconstruction of demonstratives in
Proto-Austronesian. In Mark Alves, Paul Sidwell, and David Gil (Eds.), SEALS VIII: Papers from the 8th annual meeting of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 1988 (pp. 79-92). Pacific linguistics: National Australian University.
Heine, Bernd. (1997a). Cognitive foundations of grammar. New York; Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Heine, Bernd. (1997b). Possession: Cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. (2002) World lexicon of grammaticalization.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heine, Bernd and Tania Kuteva. (2005) Language contact and grammatical change.
New York; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Himmelmann, Nicholaus P. (2005). Typological perspectives. In Alexander Adeelar
and Nicholaus P. Himmelmann (Eds.), The Austronesian languages in Asia and Madagascar (pp. 110-181). Oxon; New York: Routledge.
Huang, Yan. (2000). Anaphora. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
Iwasaki, Shoichi. (1985). Cohesion, non-challengeability and the -n desu clause in
Japanese spoken discourse. Journal of Asian Culture, 9, 125–142.
Karim, Nik Safiah, Farid M. Onn, Hashim Hj. Musa, and Abdul Hamid Mahmood.
(1995). Tatabahasa Dewan. 4th ed. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Langacker, Ronald, W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Mahdi, Waruno. (2005). Old Malay. In Alexander K. Adelaar and Nikolaus P.
Himmelmann (Eds.), The Austronesian languages in Asia and Madagascar (pp. 182-201). New York: Routledge.
Mintz, Malcom Warren. (2002). An Indonesian and Malay grammar for students.
Perth; W.A: Malay Texts and Recourses.
Reid, Lawrence A. (1994). Morphological evidence for Austric. Oceanic linguistics,
33, 323-344.
Ritsuko, Kikusawa. (2008). Historical change in pronoun positions in Extra-Formosan
languages. Studies in Philippine Languages and Cultures, 17, 66-87.
Ross, Clark. (2009). Austronesian languages. In Bernard Comrie (Ed.), World’s major
languages 2nd ed. (pp. 781-790). London; New York: Routledge.
Ross, Malcolm (2002). The history of transitivity of western Austronesian voice and
voice-marking. In F. Wouk and M. Ross (Eds.), The history and typology of western Austronesian voice systems (pp. 17-62). Camberra: Pacific Linguistics.
Sneddon, James Neil. (1996). Indonesian: A comprehensive grammar. London; New
York: Routledge.
Sneddon, James Neil. (2003). The Indonesian language: Its history and role in
modern society. Sydney: UNSW Press.
Stassen, Leon. (2009). Predicative possession. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sweetser, Eve. (2002). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural
aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tadmor, Uri. (2009). Malay-Indonesian. In Bernard Comrie (Ed.), World’s major
languages 2nd ed (pp. 791-818). London; New York: Routledge.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Richard B. Dasher. (2002). Regularity in semantic
change. Cambridge. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Winstedt, R. O. (1913). Malay grammar. London: Oxford University Press.
Yap, Foong Ha, Stephen Matthews, and Kaoru Horie (2002). From pronominalizer to
pragmatic marker - Implications for uni-directionality from a cross-linguistic perspective. In Olga Fischer, Muriel Norde and Harry Perridon (Eds.), Up and down the cline – Nature of grammaticalization (pp.137-168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Yap, Foong Ha. (2011). Referential and non-referential uses of nominalization
constructions in Malay. In Foong Ha Yap, Karen Grunow-Harsta and Janick Wrona (Eds.), Nominalization in Asian languages: Diachronic and typological perspectives (pp. 627-658). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Blust’s Austronesian Comparative Dictionary: http://www.trussel2.com/acd/
Utusan Malaysia Online: http://www.utusan.com.my/


QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔