Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/116075
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor鍾曉芳zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorChung, Siaw Fongen_US
dc.contributor.author莊舜雯zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorChuang, Shun Wenen_US
dc.creator莊舜雯zh_TW
dc.creatorChuang, Shun Wenen_US
dc.date2018en_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-02T03:48:49Z-
dc.date.available2018-03-02T03:48:49Z-
dc.date.issued2018-03-02T03:48:49Z-
dc.identifierG1031610144en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/116075-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description華語文教學碩士學位學程zh_TW
dc.description103161014zh_TW
dc.description.abstract本研究以「意」的雙字詞彙為主要研究範圍,由詞彙內部結構及上下文切入以釐清「意」的多義現象。前人關於「意」的多義現象討論不多,僅有歷時的探源研究、與內在身體部位「心」的比較以及心理學認識活動的相關論述,至今尚未有關於「意」之共時性語料庫研究。於彙整《中文詞彙網路2.0》與《教育部重編國語辭典修訂本》中「意」的義項,並清楚制定「認知」、「情感」、「意志」三個語意類別後,本研究分析了《中央研究院現代漢語平衡語料庫4.0》一千萬詞條版本中的相關語料。研究結果包含了兩個面向的討論:「意」的詞彙內部結構和語意分佈之間的關係以及「意」的意象圖式。\n 首先,研究發現「意」在構詞上屬於名詞性黏著詞根詞素,可同時作為詞在句子中自由移動的情形不多;「意」在語意上則屬於「心理集合名詞」,而心理集合名詞為一多義詞素,詞彙語意的完整有賴其共現成分。其次,「*意」結構的詞類包含了名詞、狀態動詞、動作動詞、副詞四種詞類,而「意*」結構僅包含名詞、狀態動詞、動作動詞三種。其中,「*意」的構詞能力較「意*」強,語意分佈上則皆以「意志」類為主。\n 最後,從雙音詞的上下文中發掘了「意」的三條刺激反應路徑,統整出「意」的意象圖式,得知「意」的雙字詞多用於「報導」方面。若刺激類別為「文章/話語」或「外在景色」通常由「當局經驗者」報導概念內涵或刺激為其帶來之感覺,若刺激類別為「人際客體」則通常由「旁觀經驗者」報導當局經驗者理解概念之過程、心理狀態或意志狀態。華語教師在講解「意」之詞彙時,可透過解釋其共現成分之詞意為學生建立語意類別的概念,亦可運用刺激類別及報導的方式讓學生知道「意」的雙音詞使用上的差別。\n\n關鍵字: 「意」、多義名詞、詞彙內部結構、意象圖式、中研院現代漢語平衡語料庫zh_TW
dc.description.abstractKey word: Yi4,polysemy, word component structure, image schema, Mandarin Corpus\n This thesis reports the polysemous usage of the disyllabic words containing Yi4 ‘meaning’ with the emphasis on their internal structure and co-text. Previous studies on Mandarin polysemy Yi4 mostly focused on the classic manuscripts, the comparison between Xin1 ‘heart’ and Yi4 ‘meaning’, or the philosophical system of knowing. However, none of them was based on real texts from the corpus. Based on the senses taken from the Chinese Wordnet 2.0 and the Revised Mandarin Chinese Dictionary, we categorized the usage of Yi4 as FEELING, COGNITION and INTENTION. Using these as the criteria, we analyzed the data from the Sinica Corpus 4.0. The results were discussed based on two aspects, the interrelationship between the internal structures and meaning distribution, and the image schema of Yi4.\n For the internal structures, we discovered that Yi4 serves not only as a bound-root morpheme at the syntactical level but also as a semantically polysemous psycho-collection morpheme which needs the co-occurred morpheme to fulfill its word meaning. We also found that most instances in both ‘X+Yi4’ and ‘Yi4+X’ structures belong to INTENTION, and these include nouns, action verbs, and stative verbs. However, only the ‘X+Yi4’ structure, with its stronger word-forming ability, contains adverbial use.\n In addition to internal structures, for the analysis of co-texts, we came up with the image schema of Yi4 which contains three stimulus-response routes. If the stimulus is article/speech/scenery, Yi4 tends to have a direct experiencer conducting a first-hand report about his/her feeling. If the stimulus comes from a human body, Yi4 prefers having an indirect experiencer conducting a second-hand report about the direct experiencer’s emotion, cognitive process or willing. Finally, this thesis also offers some pedagogical suggestions and application based on the findings.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents謝辭 I\n中文摘要 II\nA Corpus-based Semantic Analysis of Mandarin Polysemy /Yi4/ Abstract III\n第一章 緒論 1\n1.1 研究動機與目的 2\n1.1.1 人類高層次認知活動與「意」的相關性 2\n1.1.2 華語教材中「意」的呈現方式 4\n1.2 研究問題 9\n1.3 研究範圍 9\n1.3.1 多義詞與其他詞彙關係 9\n1.3.2 詞彙的定義與漢語的詞素類別 11\n1.4 研究架構 12\n第二章 文獻探討 13\n2.1 多義詞相關文獻 13\n2.1.1 多義詞的研究方法 14\n2.1.2 語意延伸理論 16\n2.2 漢語多義詞研究 18\n2.2.1 漢語的多義名詞 18\n2.2.2 「心」與「意」的比較 20\n2.3 認識機制與「意」的語意類別 24\n2.3.1 「情」、「知」、「意」於認識機制中的角色 24\n2.3.2 「意」的語意類別 26\n2.4 漢語雙字動詞、名詞之核心規則 31\n2.5 小結 32\n第三章 研究方法 33\n3.1 研究工具 34\n3.2 研究範圍與研究問題 35\n3.3 語料的蒐集與分類 35\n3.3.1 「意」的語料蒐集 36\n3.3.2 「意」的語料分類 39\n3.4 小結 45\n第四章 語料分析 47\n4.1 「意」於語料庫中的分佈狀況 47\n4.2 「意」的雙字詞之詞類、詞彙內部結構及語意分佈 49\n4.2.1 「意」的雙字名詞之詞彙內部結構及語意分佈 50\n4.2.2 「意」的雙字動作動詞之詞彙內部結構及語意分佈 54\n4.2.3 「意」的雙字狀態動詞之詞彙內部結構及語意分佈 56\n4.2.4 「意」的雙字副詞之詞彙內部結構及語意分佈 58\n4.3 「意」的意象圖示 59\n4.3.1 「意」之刺激反應路徑(一) 61\n4.3.2 「意」之刺激反應路徑(二) 61\n4.3.3 「意」之刺激-反應路徑(三) 62\n4.4 小結 64\n第五章 結論 65\n5.1 結語 65\n5.2 研究限制與未來研究建議 67\n參考文獻 71\n附錄一:「*意」與「意*」各詞類之詞彙內部結構與語意分佈 78\n附錄二:「*意」的詞類、構詞格式及語意類別總表 79\n附錄三:「意*」的詞類、構詞格式及語意類別總表 81zh_TW
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1031610144en_US
dc.subject「意」zh_TW
dc.subject多義名詞zh_TW
dc.subject詞彙內部結構zh_TW
dc.subject意象圖式zh_TW
dc.subject中研院現代漢語平衡語料庫zh_TW
dc.subjectYi4en_US
dc.subjectPolysemyen_US
dc.subjectWord component structureen_US
dc.subjectImage schemaen_US
dc.subjectMandarin Corpusen_US
dc.title「意」的多義現象研究:以語料庫為本zh_TW
dc.titleA Corpus-based Semantic Analysis of Mandarin Polysemy /Yi4/en_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.relation.reference步延新、張和生(2008)。義頻統計與對外漢語辭彙教學。中原華語文學報,1,185-194。\n蔡美智(2005)。以句式為本的多義詞詞義辨識。中文計算語言學期刊,10(4),483-494。\n蔡豐琪(2009)。中日身體語彙之語義延伸-以複合名詞「~口」為例。台大日本語文研究,18,115-134。\n曹逢甫、蔡立中、劉秀瑩(2001)。身體與譬喻:語言與認知的首要介面。台北:文鶴出版社。\n陳昱蓉(2014)。現代漢語「做」字詞歧義與消解歧義研究(未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學:台北。\n黃麗儀(2011)。現代漢語詞彙搭配與以學習者習得認知過程為中心的詞彙教學實踐。中原華語文學報,8,43-57。\n黃居仁(2009)。從詞彙看認知:詞彙語意學研究的趣味。蘇以文、畢永峨(主編),語言與認知。台北:國立台灣大學出版中心。\n江佳芸(2011)。從隱喻延伸看多義字的詞義認知-以「眼」字為例,第十二屆漢語詞彙語義學研討會論文,222-231。\n金恩煊(2009)。漢語觸覺詞固定語式中的情緒表達及性別角色(未出版碩士論文)。國立成功大學:台南。\n李菁菁(2014)。漢語多義詞義項區辨架構-位移動詞「出」的語料庫實證研究(未出版博士論文)。國立台灣師範大學:台北。\n李毓清(2014)。身體部位「顏kao、yan」的語義分析-以日文及中文為主。台灣日語教育學報,23,250-293。\n李壬癸(2007)。人體各部位名稱在語言上的應用,語言暨語言學,8(3),711-722。\n李金連(2005)。情知意的理念在認識機制中之角色探究,科學教育期刊,3(13),347-365。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2005.1303.05\n李子瑄、曹逢甫(2009)。漢語語言學。台北:正中書局。\n林芳玫(2007)。地表的圖紋與身體的圖紋-《行過洛津》的身分地理學。臺灣文學研究學報,5,259-288。\n林素朱(2001)。中文多義詞「出」字之語意探討(未出版碩士論文)。國立政治大學:台北。\n林佑旻(2008)。「心」的語意分析:從語言分類和文化認知談起(未出版碩士論文)。國立台灣大學:台北。\n劉怡君(2010)。漢語「面」的多義性及語法化現象(未出版碩士論文)。國立成功大學:台南。\n歐秀慧(2008)。從隱喻延伸看多義字的詞義層次認知-以「身」字為例。大葉大學通識教育學報,1,61-88。\n蘇以文(2009)。語言與分類。蘇以文、畢永峨(主編),語言與認知。台北:國立台灣大學大出版中心。\n邱湘雲(2012)。漢語足部動作詞的空間隱喻。國立彰化師範大學文學院學報,6,225-242。\n蕭惠貞、陳昱蓉(2014)。漢語詞彙歧義探究與教學應用。華語文教學研究,11(2),1-30。\n許尤芬(2012)。中文多義詞「發」之語義探討:以語料庫為本(未出版碩士論文)。台北市立教育大學:台北。\n閆麗敏(2013)。「意思」的多角度分析(未出版碩士論文)。南昌大學:南昌。\n張 敏(1998)。認知語言學與漢語名詞短語。北京:中國社會科學出版社。\n朱光安(2013)。漢語身體部位成語之情感隱喻研究與教學啟示(未出版碩士論文)。文藻大學:高雄。\n鍾杰克(2008)。韓國語「머리」與中國語「頭」語義擴張比較研究(未出版碩士論文)。中國文化大學:台北。\n劉月華主編(2008)。中文聽說讀寫,1-2冊。波士頓:劍橋出版社(Cheng & Tsui Company)。\n國立臺灣師範大學國語教學中心(2008)。實用視聽華語,1-5冊。臺北:正中書局。\n葉德明主編(2006)。遠東實用生活華語,1-3冊。臺北:遠東圖書公司。\n《中文詞彙網路2.0》: http://lope.linguistics.ntu.edu.tw/cwn2/query/\n《中央研究院現代漢語平衡語料庫4.0》:http://asbc.iis.sinica.edu.tw/\nApresjan, J.D. (1974). Regular polysemy. Linguistics, 142, 5-32.\nChen, M. H., & Chang, J. H. (2010). The meaning extension of xiang and its polysemy network. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 8(2), 1-31.\nChung, S. F. (2009). A corpus-based study on figurative language through the Chinese five elements and body-part terms. International Journal of Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing (IJCLCLP) Special Issue on Computer Assisted Language Learning, 14(2), 221-236.\nCuyckens, H. & Zawada, B. (1997). Polysemy in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.\nDuffy, Susan A., Morries, Robin K., & Rayner, Keith. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 429-446.\nFillmore, C. J. (1982). Frames semantics. In Linguistics Society of Korea (Eds.), Linguistic in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Company.\nFillmore, C. J. and Atkins, B. T. S. (2000). Describing polysemy: The case of ‘crawl’. In Ravin, Y. and Leacock, C. (Eds.) Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches, (pp.91-110). Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nGeeraerts, D. (2010). Cognitive linguistics: Basic readings. New York: Oxford University Press.\nGoddard, C. & Wierzbicka, A. (2002). Meaning and universal grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.\nGoddard, C. (1998). Semantic analysis: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nHsiao, H. S., Chen, Y. C., & Wu, Y. C. (2016). Representation of polysemy in Mandarin verbs: chī, dǎ, and xǐ. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 42(1), 1-30. \nJohnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago Press.\nKatz, J.J. (1972). Semantic theory. New York: Harper & Row.\nKilgarriff, A. (1997). I don’t believe in word senses. Computers and the Humanities, 31(2), 91-113.\nLakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.\nLakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by (周世箴,2006 Trans.), Taipei: Linking Publishing. (Original work published 1980?) \nLangacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1): Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Standard University Press.\nLeacock, C., Chodorow, M. S., & Miller G.A. (1998). Using corpus statistics and WordNet relations for sense identification. Computational Linguistics, 24(1), 47-65.\nLevin, B., & Hovav, M.R. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge: The MIT Press.\nLiu, S. (劉秀瑩) (1997). Body-part metaphors and cultural difference: Chinese and English (Unpublished M.A. Thesis). National Tsing-Hua University: Taiwan.\nLyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nMatisoff, J.A.(1986). The organic semantic approach to linguistic comparason, Variational Semantics in Tibeto-Burman, 141-229.\nMiller, G. A. (1998). Nouns in WordNet. In C. Fellbaum (Eds.), WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge: The MIT Press.\nMurphy, M. Lynne. (2003). Semantic relations and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPackard, J. L. (2000). The morphology of Chinese: A linguistic and cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nPalmer, F.R. (1981). Semantics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.\nRosh, E. (1977). Human categorization. In N. Warren (Eds.), Advances in cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 7). London: Academic Press. \nTsai, L.(蔡立中). (1994). The metaphor of body-parts in Chinese (Unpublished M.A. Thesis). National Tsing-Hua University: Taiwan.\nTylor, J.R. (1989). Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.\nWeinstein, U. (1964). Webster`s third: A critique of its semantics. International Journal of American Linguistics, 30, 405-409.\nWittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. Oxford University Press.\nYu, Ning. (2009). From body to meaning in culture. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.zh_TW
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypethesis-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.