詞義成分在TCSL的分析與應用－從「吃麥當勞」談起

Semantic Components and Their Analysis and Application in TCSL-Taking "Eating McDonald's" as an Example

10.29748/TJCSL.201012.0002

許長謨(Chang-Mo Hsu)

對外華語教學 ； 語義成分 ； 語義學 ； 詞彙學 ； TCSL ； Semantic Components ； Semantics ； Lexicology

臺灣華語教學研究

1期．總第1期（2010 / 12 / 01）

19 - 38

繁體中文

語言中的語義問題常依附在語音或構詞語法中呈現，形成語言的結構關係（Structuralism）。對外華語教學的學習者多屬成年的外國人，溝通時比較重視語義的正確性。由於學習者的音韻、語法能力薄淺，直接影響到對語（詞）義的領會，而其隨機或積蓄而迸發的語義問題往往或因跳脫教學者母語的構詞與語用習性，致教學者措手不及；或因平日習焉不察的問題在教學當場提問，而使教師難以第一時間回應。因此，華語教師須有一定的認知。在詞義的基本分析時，音韻問題一確立，就須直接面對構詞或語法的橫向組合（Syntagmatic）關係，先由上下語境（Co-text）確立語感的正確度，再縱向的嘗試其他的聚合（Paradigmatic）關係，以確認相似詞的正確度。後設檢驗中，符號學三角形（Triangle of Semiology）中「Word（Symbol）- Thought（Concept）- Thing（Referent）」的遞延關係是個分析原則。但在延伸應用或舉例時，使用語意成分（Semantic Components）的析離及上下義位的檢竅，或傳統語義學同義詞或反義詞等觀念做對比來檢驗語義的合宜度，都可以增進教學時對華語詞義的確認。本論文意圖利用幾個實際有效的角度，以實際教學為例，探討語義學（Semantics）的分析與應用。由於範圍過大，因此擬從「我們去吃麥當勞」一句漸漸通行的話語談起，舉用引出相關的教學原理，進以語義學理論論析如何輔助對外華語之教學。

Problems with semantics are often related to phonetic and syntactic issues, and reveal the nature of the structure of language. Most learners of Chinese as a second language are foreign adults, for whom accurate meaning is very important, but whose insufficient phonological and syntactic competence obstructs comprehension. However, their semantics-related questions during class are often impossible for teachers to answer using only their native speaker intuition. As a result, common but easily-missed problems frequently baffle first-time instructors. Therefore, an effective Chinese language teacher should possess some understanding of semantics.At the basic level of semantic analysis, once phonological problems are established, the cross-sectional syntagmatic relationship between morphology and syntax must be directly confronted. First, context must be used to determine the accuracy of one's language intuition, and then other paradigmatic relationships must be tested longitudinally to confirm the accuracy of similar words. The ”Word (Symbol) - Thought (Concept) - Thing (Referent)” relationship of the Triangle of Semiology is an important analytical principle for attaining a proper understanding. However, while extending its application, we must use semantic components to examine the hyponymy, or the synonyms, polysemy and antonyms in classical semantics, and compare the appropriate usage. This can enhance the effectiveness of Chinese teaching.This paper attempts to use pedagogy as an example, and from several realistic perspectives explores the analysis and application of semantics. In order to narrow the scope of this study, we begin with the example sentence ”Eating McDonald's” to elicit relevant pedagogical principles, and expound on ways for semantic theories to support the teaching of Chinese as a foreign language.

1. Lakoff, G.,Johnson, M.(1980).Metaphors we live by.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
2. Leech, Geoffrey N.(1974).Semantics.Harmondsworth:Penguin.
3. Li, Charles、Thompson, Sandra、黃宣範譯(1982)。A reference grammar of Chinese。臺北:文鶴。
4. Lyons, John(1995).Linguistic Semantics: An introduction.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
5. Saussure, Ferdinand de(1995).Cours de linguistique générale.Paris:Payot & Rivages.
6. 伍謙光(1988)。語義學導論。湖南:湖南教育。
7. 竺家寧(1999)。漢語詞彙學。臺北:五南。
8. 連金發(2000)。構詞學問題探索。漢學研究，18，61-78。
9. 湯廷池(1988)。漢語詞法句法論集。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
10. 賈彥德(1999)。漢語語義學。北京:北京大學。
11. 趙元任、丁邦新譯(1994)。中國話的文法。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
12. 劉月華(1996)。實用現代漢語語法。臺北:師大書苑。
13. 劉蘭英、孫全洲(1993)。語法與修辭。臺北:新學識。
14. 鄧守信(1984)。漢語主賓格的語意研究。臺北:臺灣學生書局。
15. 謝國平(2000)。語言學概論。臺北:三民書局。