助動詞「會」情態語義演變之共時構擬－－基於跨語言／方言的比較研究

Reconstruction of the Semantic-Development Path of the Modal Verb Hui (會) with Crosslinguisitic and Dialectal Evidence

漢語的情態助動詞「會」有一些不同於其他情態詞的語義特性，它的語義演變過程至今仍有爭議。「會」語義特性的產生動因和它的語義演變路徑是本研究要探索的兩個問題。我們在發掘「會」的條件必然等功能的基礎上，以「語義地圖模型」為理論工具通過跨方言／語言的比較構擬了它的情態語義演變路徑，最後用「語義結構分析法」檢驗該路徑的合理性。我們認為該構擬的解釋力在於：符合代表跨語言共性的語義地圖，可解釋「會」及相關情態詞的語義特性，推進了情態語義地圖的研究。另外，在與「能」「要」等近義情態詞的比較中，我們也剖析了「會」的用法特點。本研究是用語義地圖來解釋具體語言現象的嘗試，從中可見：特定語言內的跨方言比較可以補充並豐富跨語言共性的研究。

This paper focuses on the modals of Mental Ability from a variety of Chinese dialects as well as non-Chinese languages, attempting to build up a mini-map centering on Mental Ability, as a refinement of the current study on modality’s semantic map. This topic involves a variety of important theoretical issues, from the identification of new modal functions on the semantic map which have not been noted before to the exploration of the essential distinction between Mental Ability and Physical Ability. Our interest in this topic is intrigued by three interesting issues concerning the Mental Ability modal verb hui 會 in Standard Mandarin and its cognate or corresponding morphemes in Chinese dialects (hui hereafter). The hui-type modals in Chinese dialects have three properties, i.e. their modal functions cover a range from possibility to necessity; the ‘ability’ use is strictly restricted to Mental/Intellectual Ability; and its epistemic use has a strong tendency to have a future-time reference. In addition, its semantic change process has been a controversial issue so far. With the ‘Semantic Map Model’, a new typological tool, we reconstruct hui’s semantic development path by cross-linguistic comparison, the core of which is ‘mental ability → objective necessity → epistemic probability’. It is proved that this reconstruction has its advantages over other proposals in more adequate explanation of the semantic properties of the hui-type modals in Chinese dialects, and it is fully in line with relevant universals in crosslinguistic semantic-connection. It demonstrates that adopting typological approaches to the studies of specific languages can benefit not only the research on linguistic particulars, but also language universals.