中文時間副詞的時長與認知視角關係： 以「這下」、「當下」、「現在」為例

Abstract

人類如何表達抽象的時間概念是長久以來扣人心弦的議題之一。在語言學領域，過去學者經常關注的時間議題像是：動詞的表現隱含時間的定位與跨度、具象的空間詞彙可能演變為抽象的時間詞彙、時間詞語可於篇章中標示特定連貫功能等等。語言學在時間研究上似乎已取得非常豐富的成果，也有不少專論針對不同時間詞進行討論。然而當筆者關注近義時間副詞「這下」、「當下」、「現在」時，發現過去的研究角度仍不足以闡釋箇中差異，因其除了時長的不同以外，還牽涉認知視角的問題。因此本研究將從時長與視角兩個面向切入，並以認知語法理論為框架，探討這三個時間副詞。 首先，本文採用胡裕樹、范曉（1995）的情狀分類系統，分析「這下」、「當下」、「現在」的謂語搭配傾向。經過標記與統計，我們發現「這下」經常與「結果類」情狀作搭配，顯示其為時點，且與結果義息息相關。「當下」可與「瞬間類」、「持續類」情狀作搭配，分別表達不同語意：與「瞬間類」搭配時，意為「這/那個時刻、立刻」，時間上表示時點；與「持續類」搭配時，意為「說話時候的情況」，可與「現在」替換。「現在」可與「結果類」、「瞬間類」、「持續類」的情狀搭配，表示其可為時點或時段，然而因「持續類」的搭配比例較高，顯示「現在」傾向表達時段的概念。 本文的第二部分以Langacker認知語法中的入場（grounding）及Traugott的主觀化（subjectification）為框架，分析時間副詞「這下」、「當下」、「現在」展現的說者視角和語用。研究結果發現，以Langacker的觀點可將這三個詞彙的用法區分為兩個類別：「低主觀性類」與「高主觀性類」。 「這下」與「當下」具有「低主觀性類」用法，用於「較客觀」的語境中，例如描述故事、過去經驗或假設性事件。雖然在此情況下，二者可互換而不造成語法問題，然而「識解」仍造成兩者意涵的不同。說者（敘述者）在使用「這下」時較涉入情節，形成類似自由間接引語（Free indirect discourse）的手法；而「當下」使用時，說者則不涉入情節，通常在間接引語（indirect discourse）中出現。 「這下」、「當下」、「現在」皆有「高主觀性類」用法，它們以說話者時間為參照點，用於對話或描述現實的語境中。在這類用法下，三者語意有重疊之處，因此某些情況下可以互換。然而由於說者對說話時刻的識解不同，這三個詞也不是所有情況都能夠互相替換。首先，「這下」表示說話者近距離說話時間，並將目光導向未來。第二，「當下」暗示說者站在距離說話時間較遠的位置，導致其視野範圍較廣。第三，「現在」也表示說話者是近距離於說話時間，然其目光導向附近的範圍。 最後，由於Langacker的理論仍不足以比較三詞之間的主觀化程度，因此我們也納入了Traugott的觀點補充說明。我們發現「這下」是三個詞彙中主觀化程度最高的，其次是「當下」，最低是「現在」。 本文顯示時間副詞「這下」、「當下」、「現在」可由動詞、語法標記體現時間跨度的不同，亦可從說者的視角解釋語用上的差異。期望本研究能夠為未來的時間研究或文學作品研究者提供新的切入視角。

How humans express abstract concepts of time has long been a captivating issue. In linguistics, previous scholars frequently focused on temporal issues such as: the time locations and time spans indicated by verbs and tenses, the evolution of concrete spatial words into abstract temporal words, and the specific discourse functions prompted by temporal words. Plentiful achievements have been made in studying time in linguistics, and there are also many studies discussing particular temporal adverbs. However, as we explore the near-synonymous temporal adverbs zhèxià (這下), dāngxià (當下), and xiànzài (現在), it is observed that the frameworks provided by previous research are insufficient to explain the differences among them, as they involve not only differences in duration but also issues related to cognition. Therefore, this thesis aims to investigate these three temporal adverbs with regard to duration and cognition via approaches based on cognitive grammar. Firstly, Hu & Fan’s (1995) situation classification system was adopted to analyze and mark the type of situations that tend to collocate with zhèxià, dāngxià, and xiànzài. The total number of corpus data analyzed is 1504, which consists of 581 tokens of zhèxià, 450 tokens of dāngxià, and 473 tokens of xiànzài. After these data have been categorized through Hu & Fan’s system, it is discovered that zhèxià often co-occurs with result-type situations, which indicates its “punctual” nature and the relation with the “result” meaning. Dāngxià can collocate with instant-type and continuous-type situations, but expresses different meanings depending on the collocation. With instant-type situations, dāngxià conveys the meaning of “immediately or at this/that moment”; with continuous-type, it means “a situation that exists at the time of speaking” which is interchangeable with xiànzài. Xiànzài can collocate with result-type, instant-type, and continuous-type situations, which suggests it has both punctual and durative properties; however, due to the higher proportion of collocations with continuous-type situations, xiànzài is more likely to express a durative concept. The second part of this thesis takes Langacker’s “grounding” and Traugott’s subjectification as frameworks to analyze the speaker’s perspectives and pragmatic functions of zhèxià, dāngxià, and xiànzài. From Langacker’s viewpoint, the usage of the three terms can be divided into two categories: less subjective class and more subjective class. Zhèxià and dāngxià have less subjective uses, which are used to describe stories, past experiences, or subjunctive events. Although these words are interchangeable in these contexts, they convey different senses due to different construals. When zhèxià is used, the speaker (narrator) is more involved in the narrative scene, thus creating the effect of free indirect discourse. In contrast, dāngxià is typically used in indirect discourse, suggesting that the speaker (narrator) stays away from the storyline. On the other hand, zhèxià, dāngxià, and xiànzài all possess more subjective uses, which take the point of speech as a reference and are employed in dialogues or contexts that describe reality. The three words are interchangeable, but not always due to the differences in how the speaker construes speech time. Firstly, zhèxià indicates that the speaker stands close to the point of speech and directs his attention to the future. Secondly, dāngxià suggests that the speaker is more distant from the point of speech, where his temporal perspective is broader. Thirdly, xiànzài implies that the speaker also stays close to the speech time but directs his attention to the nearby temporal region. Finally, since Langacker’s theory is still insufficient to compare the degree of subjectivity between the three words, we also included Traugott’s perspective to provide supplementary explanations. It is discovered that zhèxià has the highest degree of subjectivity, dāngxià is the second, and xiànzài the lowest. This study reveals that the temporal adverbs zhèxià (這下), dāngxià (當下), and xiànzài (現在) can reflect differences in the time span through verbs and grammatical markers, and can also explain the pragmatic distinctions through the speaker’s perspectives. We hope that this study provides new angles for future research on time or literary works.