發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-05 05:02

  本文選題：模糊限定語　切入點(diǎn)：分類　出處：《南京大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：漢語和日語中都存在著大量的模糊限定語。中曰模糊限定語在分類、語義、語用方面有著廣泛的共通點(diǎn)，也有許多不同之處。本文圍繞兩大問題對中曰模糊限定語進(jìn)行了對比分析，一是從詞性分類、語義、語用這三個(gè)角度分析中日模糊限定語的異同作用；二是分析中日兩國模糊限定語產(chǎn)生的異同原因。針對第一個(gè)問題，即從詞性分類、語義、語用這三個(gè)角度分析中日模糊限定語的異同作用，分析得出結(jié)果如下：從詞性分類和語義方面來看，中日模糊限定語共通點(diǎn)如下：種類豐富、詞性范圍廣。副詞、助詞、概數(shù)詞、短語四個(gè)構(gòu)成部分都是共有的。并且，副詞發(fā)揮模糊限定語作用這點(diǎn)在兩種語言中都非常突出。在語義作用上都有去模糊化和模糊化的作用。不同點(diǎn)如下：詞性上來看，漢語和日語中各有特殊的分類。如，日語中有形式體言、副助詞、助動詞、連語這四項(xiàng)，漢語里有動詞、情態(tài)動詞、形容詞這三項(xiàng)；日語里虛詞多而漢語中實(shí)詞多；從總數(shù)上來看，日語中模糊限定語的數(shù)量也比漢語多。語義上來看，曰語中模糊限定語的用量比漢語大，詞語更豐富，使用起來更復(fù)雜。從語用上看，中日模糊限定語的共通點(diǎn)是兩者都遵循合作原則、禮儀原則、適當(dāng)原則，有著促進(jìn)交流的作用。就不同點(diǎn)而言，日語中使用頻率比漢語高；在語用的消極作用方面略有差異，在因使用模糊限定語而削弱自己的主張這點(diǎn)上日語比較突出，而在因使用模糊限定語而夸大其詞方面漢語比較突出。最后，日語的語言構(gòu)造本身比較復(fù)雜，對于外國人來說相對難以理解。針對第二個(gè)問題，即分析中日兩國模糊限定語產(chǎn)生的異同原因，分析得出結(jié)果如下：中曰模糊限定語有共通之處的原因在于：首先，中日兩國都是世界公認(rèn)的“禮儀之邦”，兩國人民在生活及語言表達(dá)各方面都很注重委婉．其次，兩國模糊限定語的使用都出于“顧慮他人”和“保護(hù)自己”這兩個(gè)動機(jī)。最后，兩國的模糊流行也是原因之一。共通點(diǎn)的深層原因可以說是兩國對委婉文化的推崇。而兩國模糊限定語存在差異的原因，歸因于中日兩國歷史地理差異、社會環(huán)境差異、文化差異、民族心理差異、語言差異這五點(diǎn)。歷史地理差異是指，日本是島國而中國是大陸國家，日語相對于大陸性的漢語而言具有“柔軟性”，以心傳心的技術(shù)十分發(fā)達(dá)。社會環(huán)境差異是指，由于日本的村落社會意識和集團(tuán)主義發(fā)達(dá)，交流時(shí)更加注重用模糊限定語來保持和諧。文化差異是指，日本有著朦朧的審美情趣，十分重視聽話人的感受。民族心理差異是指，日本延續(xù)著“嬌寵”心理和受害意識，為了和周圍融為一體而喜愛用委婉表達(dá)。語言差異是指，日語作為黏著語，重注語句間的關(guān)聯(lián)性，，盡量避免斷定的語言；而漢語作為孤立語，主謂構(gòu)造鮮明嚴(yán)密，一目了然�？偨Y(jié)起來，日語比漢語的委婉度高，更多地使用模糊限定語。
[Abstract]:There are a lot of hedges in both Chinese and Japanese.There are many similarities and differences in classification, semantics and pragmatics.This paper makes a contrastive analysis of the Chinese and Japanese hedges around two major problems. One is to analyze the similarities and differences between the Chinese and Japanese hedges from the three angles of part of speech classification, semantics and pragmatics.The second is to analyze the differences and similarities between China and Japan.Aiming at the first problem, this paper analyzes the similarities and differences between Chinese and Japanese hedges from the three angles of part of speech classification, semantics and pragmatics. The results are as follows: from the aspect of part of speech classification and semantics,The common points of Chinese and Japanese vague qualifiers are as follows: rich variety and wide range of parts of speech.Adverbs, auxiliary words, general words and phrases are all common parts.Moreover, adverbs play an important role in both languages.The semantic function has the function of defuzzification and fuzzification.The differences are as follows: part of speech, Chinese and Japanese have a special classification.For example, in Japanese there are four items: formal body words, auxiliary words, auxiliary verbs, and connectives; in Chinese, there are verbs, modal verbs and adjectives; there are more function words in Japanese and more notional words in Chinese; in terms of the total number of words,There are also more hedges in Japanese than in Chinese.Semantically speaking, the quantity of vague qualifiers in Japanese is larger than that in Chinese, and the words are more abundant and more complicated to use.From the pragmatic point of view, the common point of Chinese and Japanese hedges is that both of them follow the principles of cooperation, etiquette and propriety, and play a role in promoting communication.In terms of differences, Japanese is used more frequently than Chinese, and there is a slight difference in the negative effects of pragmatics, and Japanese is more prominent in weakening its claims because of the use of vague qualifiers.Chinese is more prominent in exaggerating words because of the use of vague qualifiers.Finally, the language structure of Japanese itself is complex, relatively difficult for foreigners to understand.In view of the second question, that is, to analyze the similarities and differences between China and Japan, the results are as follows: firstly, China and Japan are universally recognized as "countries of etiquette and ceremony", and the reasons for the similarities between them are: first of all, both China and Japan are recognized as "countries of etiquette" in the world.The people of both countries attach great importance to euphemism in all aspects of life and language.Secondly, the use of vague qualifiers in both countries is motivated by "worrying about others" and "protecting oneself".Finally, the fuzziness of the two countries is one of the reasons.The deep reason of common point can be said to be the praise of euphemism culture between the two countries.The reasons for the differences between the two countries are attributed to the historical and geographical differences, social environment differences, cultural differences, national psychological differences and language differences between China and Japan.Historical and geographical differences mean that Japan is an island country and China is a mainland country. Compared with continental Chinese, Japanese has "softness", and the technology of heart transmission is very developed.The difference of social environment means that due to the development of social consciousness and collectivism in Japanese villages, more attention is paid to the use of vague qualifiers to maintain harmony in communication.Cultural difference means that Japan has a vague aesthetic taste and attaches great importance to the feelings of the hearer.National psychological difference means that Japan continues its "spoiled" mentality and victimization consciousness and prefers euphemism in order to integrate itself with its surroundings.Language difference means that Japanese, as a cohesive language, stresses the relationship between sentences, and tries to avoid concluding language, while Chinese, as an isolated language, has a sharp and rigorous subject and predicate structure, which is clear at a glance.To sum up, Japanese is more euphemistic than Chinese and uses more hedges.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：H146;H36

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 朱邦芳;簡單陳述句中的地點(diǎn)和時(shí)間限定語[J];中國俄語教學(xué);1994年01期

2 張躍偉;;學(xué)術(shù)語篇中可能性情態(tài)與模糊限定語的接面分析[J];洛陽師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

3 吳貽翼;試談蘇聯(lián)科學(xué)院《現(xiàn)代標(biāo)準(zhǔn)俄語語法》中的限定語[J];外國語(上海外國語學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));1980年03期

4 任守;關(guān)于Нет N_2和Нет N_2N_3[J];中國俄語教學(xué);1986年04期

5 李丹;;工程執(zhí)業(yè)信函限定語的言語行為與翻譯策略[J];長沙鐵道學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會科學(xué)版);2009年02期

6 山崎直樹,李運(yùn)富;《左傳》中“吾”“我”格表示的分裂條件[J];古漢語研究;1993年01期

7 錢洪良;俄語中的限定語及其句位問題[J];教學(xué)研究(外語學(xué)報(bào));1990年02期

8 田文琪;俄語中的多事件簡單句[J];中國俄語教學(xué);1988年01期

9 趙霞;“扒”“扒竊”和“扒手”[J];語文建設(shè);2005年03期

10 高憲哲;并列表述方法談[J];天津市財(cái)貿(mào)管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 沈彤;中國英語學(xué)習(xí)者議論文中模糊限定語的使用情況[D];廣東外語外貿(mào)大學(xué);2015年

2 劉雅君;中日模糊限定語的對比分析[D];南京大學(xué);2014年

本文編號：1713292