請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/101544完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 呂佳蓉 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Chia-Rung Lu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 余祐韻 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | You-Yun Yu | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2026-02-11T16:14:32Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2026-02-12 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2026-02-11 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2026 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2026-02-02 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | Ahn, R. (2012). 한국어 유의어 타동사 연구 : {가르다:나누다}, {깨다:부수다}, {찢다:째다}를 중심으로 [A Study of Synonymous Transitive Verbs in Korean: Focusing on garuta–nanuta, kkayta–busuta, and jjitta–jjayta.] [석사학위논문, 상명대학교].
Chen, J. (2007). 'He cut-break the rope': Encoding and categorizing cutting and breaking events in Mandarin. Cognitive Linguistics, 18(2), 273-285. Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press. Cruse, D. A. (2004). Meaning in language: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford University Press. Du, J., & Li, F. T. (2022). The convergence and divergence of extension and intension on semantic change: Evidence from Chinese pò. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 20(2), 438-475. Du, J. L., Fuyin. (2019). A Multidimensional Semantic Analysis of BREAK Verbs. Foreign Languages Research, 36(6), 22-29. Evans, V. (2005). The meaning of time: polysemy, the lexicon and conceptual structure. Journal of linguistics, 41(1), 33-75. Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press. François, A. (2008). Semantic maps and the typology of colexification: Intertwining polysemous networks across languages. In From polysemy to semantic change (pp. 163-215). John Benjamins Publishing Company. Geeraerts, D. (1997). Diachronic prototype semantics: A contribution to historical lexicology. Oxford University Press. Geeraerts, D. (2009). Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford University Press. Geeraerts, D., & Cuyckens, H. (2007). The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. Oxford University Press. Guerssel, M., Hale, K., Laughren, M., Levin, B., & Eagle, J. W. (1985). A cross-linguistic study of transitivity alternations. Cls, 21(2), 48-63. Ho, H. (2008). The polysemy of PO in mandarin chinese [Poster Papers]. ROCLING 2008 Taipei, Taiwan. Huang, S. L., Suchu; Ma, Weiyun; Chen, Kehjiann. (2015). Semantic Roles and Semantic Role Labeling. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago press. Jung, H. (2019). 동사'break'와'깨다'의 어휘 의미지도 [A Lexical Semantic Map of the Verbs Break and Kkayta]. 인문사회과학연구, 20(3), 285-310. Jung, H. (2020). break 의 의미 유형과 목적어 연어에 따른 한국어 대응표현 연구 [A Study on the Meanings of Break and Its Korean Correspondences According to Object Collocations] [박사학위논문, 부경대학교]. Kövecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press. Kwon, I. (2016). How do Koreans break and cut things?: A cognitive-semantics approach to BREAK predicates and CUT predicates in Korean. Linguistic Research, 33(1). Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago press. Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Metaphor and thought (2 ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics, 159-174. Langacker, R. W. (1982). Space grammar, analysability, and the English passive. Language, 22-80. Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar: Volume I: Theoretical prerequisites (Vol. 1). Stanford university press. Langacker, R. W. (2002). Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar (Vol. 1). Walter de Gruyter. Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar. In Cognition and pragmatics (pp. 78-85). John Benjamins Publishing Company. Liu, Z. (2015). The Contrastive Study of The Semantic Components of Cutting and Breaking Verbs in English and Chinese [Master's thesis, Hunan University]. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 2). Cambridge university press. Majid, A., Boster, J. S., & Bowerman, M. (2008). The cross-linguistic categorization of everyday events: A study of cutting and breaking. Cognition, 109(2), 235-250. Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Staden, M. v., & Boster, J. S. (2007). The semantic categories of cutting and breaking events: A crosslinguistic perspective. Coginitive Linguistic, 18(2), 133-152. Mitsugi, M. (2017). Schema-Based Instruction on Learning English Polysemous Words: Effects of Instruction and Learners' Perceptions. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 21-43. Oakley, T. (2010). Image schemas. In The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 214–235). Oxford University Press. Pye, C., Loeb, D. F., & Pao, Y.-Y. (1996). The acquisition of breaking and cutting. In E. V. Clark (Ed.), Proceedings of the twenty-seventh Annual Child Language Research Forum (pp. 227-236). CSLI Publications. Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (2008). Towards a theory of metonymy. In Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17-59). John Benjamins Publishing Company. Richards, I. A. (1936). The Philosophy of Rhetoric. Oxford University Press. Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (1992). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Routledge. Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 104(3), 192–233. Saeed, J. I. (2015). Semantics (Vol. 25). John Wiley & Sons. Shi, H. (2010). Syntactic and Semantic Features of "V-Po" and Their Evolution. Journal of Shanghai Normal University(Philosophy & Social Sciences Edition), 04(39), 123-130. Tai, J. H. Y. (2000). 新世紀臺灣語言學研究之展望 [Perspectives on Linguistic Research in Taiwan in the New Century.]. 漢學研究 [Chinese Studies], 18, 511-519. Taylor, J. R. (2003). Linguistic categorization. Oxford University Press. Thepkanjana, K., & Uehara, S. (2007). Semantic extension of the verb of breaking in Thai and Japanese. Manusya: Journal of Humanities, 10(3), 95-114. Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2001). Regularity in semantic change (Vol. 97). Cambridge University Press. Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2001). Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 77(4), 724-765. Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2004). Applying cognitive linguistics to pedagogical grammar: The case of over. Cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition, and foreign language teaching, 18, 257-280. Wang, P. (2009). From Usage to Construction: A Cognitive Linguistic Study on the Polysemous V-kai Resultative Verbs in Mandarin Chinese [Master's thesis, National Taiwan University]. Wang, W. (2024). Contrastive Analysis of Conceptual Metaphor of Chinese and Western Color Terms. Modern Linguistics, 12(9), 649-657. Ye, S. (2018). A comparative analysis on the polysemy of 'Qi' in Mandarin and Japanese: a study based on metaphor and metonymy [Doctoral thesis, National Chengchi University]. | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/101544 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究從認知語意學的角度，探討臺灣華語動詞「破」以及韓語動詞「깨다」的多義現象。以 Evans（2005）的「原則性多義框架」（Principled Polysemy）為理論基礎，透過語料庫分析，辨識出兩個動詞各自的義項，涵蓋從核心的「物理破損義」到透過隱喻與轉喻延伸的延伸語義等多重用法。在跨語言比較層面，結果顯示兩語之動詞在搭配詞種類與語義擴張上具有差異。「破」在「物理破損義」上可搭配之具體事物種類較廣，可以描述堅硬物或彈性物體的受損。而「깨다」在「物理破損義」上只適用於堅硬或易碎物上。兩種語言亦呈現各自獨有的語義:「破」展現出「揭穿義」、「品質差義」、「語助詞義」與「淫蕩義」等。而「깨다」則具有「故障義」、「遭受情感挫折義」與「驚訝義」等用法。
總結來說，本研究有助於理解破壞類動詞的語義延伸方式，並為第二語言學習者在掌握字面與延伸用法方面提供參考。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | This study examines the polysemy of the verbs pò 破 in Taiwan Mandarin and kkayta 깨다 in Korean from a cognitive-semantic perspective. Guided by the Principled Polysemy framework (Evans, 2005), data analysis identifies ten distinct senses for pò 破 and nine distinct senses for kkayta 깨다, ranging from the core Physically Damaged Sense to extended metaphorical senses. These sense extensions are primarily motivated by metaphor and metonymy, projecting the prototypical meaning of physical breakage onto abstract domains. Cross-linguistic comparison reveals differences in the range of collocates and domain expansion. In Taiwan Mandarin, pò 破 allows a wide range of collocates when describing damage to concrete objects, while Korean kkayta 깨다 has fewer collocates with concrete objects. Each language also exhibits unique senses: pò 破 shows the Uncover, Poor Quality, Expletive, and Slut Sense, while kkayta 깨다 manifests the Malfunction, Experiencing Emotional Setback, and Surprise Sense. To sum up, this research contributes to understanding how physical breakage verbs extend semantically and provides insights for second language learners navigating literal and figurative uses. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2026-02-11T16:14:32Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2026-02-11T16:14:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 致謝 i
摘要 ii Abstract iii Table of Contents iv List of Figures vii List of Tables ix List of Abbreviations x Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Research background and Motivation 1 1.2 Research question and objectives 4 1.3 Organization 4 Chapter 2 Literature Review 6 2.1 Models and Mechanisms for Polysemy 6 2.1.1 Principled polysemy Approach 6 2.1.2 Image schema 9 2.1.3 Metaphor 13 2.1.4 Metonymy 14 2.2 Previous studies on pò 破 and kkayta 깨다 17 2.2.1 Previous studies on breaking verb 17 2.2.2 Relative polysemy studies on pò 破 18 2.2.3 Relative polysemy studies on kkayta 깨다 20 Chapter 3 Methodology 24 3.1 Theoretical stance on sense identification 24 3.2 Data Source 24 3.3 Data Processing 27 3.3.1 Data processing for pò 破 27 3.3.2 Data processing for kkayta 깨다 27 3.4 Data Analysis 29 3.4.1 Analysis Procedure 29 3.4.2 Reliability of Sense Identification 33 Chapter 4 Meaning extension of pò and kkayta 35 4.1 Prototypical sense of pò 破 and kkayta 깨다 35 4.1.1 Prototypical sense of pò 破 35 4.1.2 Prototypical sense for kkayta 깨다 37 4.2 Senses of pò 破 38 4.2.1 Physically Damaged Sense 39 4.2.2 Removal of Obstacle Sense 43 4.2.3 Defeat Sense 46 4.2.4 Exceed Sense 48 4.2.5 Uncover Sense 52 4.2.6 Change of State Sense 54 4.2.7 Cost Sense 56 4.2.8 Poor Quality Sense 58 4.2.9 Slut Sense 60 4.2.10 Expletive Sense 62 4.2.11 The Semantic network for pò 破 66 4.3 Senses of kkayta깨다 67 4.3.1 Physically Damaged Sense 67 4.3.2 Removal of Obstacle Sense 71 4.3.3 Exceed Sense 74 4.3.4 Defeat Sense 77 4.3.5 Change of State Sense 78 4.3.6 Cost Sense 80 4.3.7 Malfunction Sense 83 4.3.8 Experiencing Emotional Setback Sense 85 4.3.9 Surprise Sense 88 4.3.10 The Semantic network for kkayta 깨다 91 4.4 Comparison Between pò 破and kkayta깨다 93 4.4.1 Quantitative Distribution 93 4.4.2 Qualitative Comparison 97 Chapter 5 Conclusion 102 5.1 Summary of this study 102 5.2 Limitations and Future Studies 103 Reference 105 | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.subject | 多義詞 | - |
| dc.subject | 破壞類動詞 | - |
| dc.subject | 認知語義學 | - |
| dc.subject | 對比研究 | - |
| dc.subject | 意象圖式 | - |
| dc.subject | 隱喻 | - |
| dc.subject | 轉喻 | - |
| dc.subject | polysemy | - |
| dc.subject | breaking verb | - |
| dc.subject | cognitive linguistic | - |
| dc.subject | contrastive study | - |
| dc.subject | image schema | - |
| dc.subject | metaphor | - |
| dc.subject | metonymy | - |
| dc.title | 臺灣華語「破」與韓語「깨다」多義之認知語意研究 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Cognitive-Semantic Study of the Polysemy of pò in Taiwan Mandarin and kkayta in Korean | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 114-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 賴惠玲;陳冠超 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Huei-Ling Lai;Kuan-Chao Chen | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 多義詞,破壞類動詞認知語義學對比研究意象圖式隱喻轉喻 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | polysemy,breaking verbcognitive linguisticcontrastive studyimage schemametaphormetonymy | en |
| dc.relation.page | 109 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202600483 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2026-02-03 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 文學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 語言學研究所 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2026-02-12 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 語言學研究所 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-114-1.pdf | 2.73 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。