查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 漢語方言音系的地理考察:韻母篇=Chinese Dialects: Final System |
---|---|
作 者 | 張光宇; | 書刊名 | 清華學報 |
卷 期 | 34:2 2004.12[民93.12] |
頁 次 | 頁513-550 |
分類號 | 802.4 |
關鍵詞 | 漢語方言; 韻母; 地理考察; 歷史發展; Chinese dialect; Final system; Geographical investigation; Historical developments; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 漢語方言韻母最多的是廣東佛山(94個),最少的是雲南賓川(22個)。大體言之,南方韻母多,北方韻母少。藉著地理考察,我們一方面可以看到現代漢語方言“河北江南,最為鉅異”的一面,也可以看到“你中有我,我中有你”的相似或平行發展。“如有理據,必屬能產”(If a phonological rule is well-grounded phonetically, this rule must be a productive rule.)就是從韻母發展的探討汲取的結晶,意思是說:如果一個語音變化道理說得清楚,那個變化或類似的平行變化就可能在不同的方言重複上演,不管地理遠近。語音變化的道理是一種邏輯過程,歷史上已經分隔不相統屬的方言也可能呈現相同的邏輯過程。例如“呂luei”既見於山西,也見於貴州;進一步的發展(讀lei)既見於北方也見於南方。山西與貴州的方言歷史關係雖不透明,但是這個語音變化的邏輯過程十分清晰:從ly兩音的氣流機制就可以理解。 |
英文摘要 | The number of finals varies greatly from one dialect to another in China. The largest stock (94) is found in Foshan, Guangdong; the least (22) in Binchuan, Yunnan. Extremes aside, the general tendency indicates that the figure decreases as one travels from the south to the north or from the eastern coast westward into the inlands. As a break from the traditional exercises, in which vertical comparison dominated Chinese dialectology, this paper demonstrates how a horizontal comparison can be put into practice to derive the various modern forms. In this respect, I find Hoenigswald’s remark most inspiring; he said: “It should, however, be understood that neither the comparative method nor internal reconstruction depend on written records.” (1991:187) The same tone is also echoed in Crowley (1997:111): “the written records do not provide us with the same forms that the comparative method leads us to reconstruct.” Examples that were used by Crowley to arrive at this conclusion are drawn from the Latin languages, but I think the same principle holds true in other language family as well. In an era when vertical comparison monopolizes the entire realm of Chinese dialectology, phonological rules are a wooly matter—phonetic motivation not so much a concern. Last but not least, a few words about “Uniformitarinism”; as Rankin (2003) puts it: “the method also relies on the more general scientific notion of uniformitarianism, here the understanding that basic mechanisms of linguistic change in the past (e.g., phonetic change, reanalysis, extension, etc.) were not substantially different from those observed in the present. Most linguists operate with this as a given and it has not received detailed treatment in most studies of language change, but without the assumption of uniformitariansm, reconstruction would not be possible.” Much ink has been spilled about methodology, and I hope the above quotes should give readers useful guidance clear enough to get down to the bottom. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。