新加坡华语口语的补语标记 “得” 和 “到” = The complement markers de and dao in spoken Singapore Mandarin Chinese

• Main Author: 林宇政 Lim, Yu Zheng
• Other Authors: Lin Jingxia
• Format: Final Year Project
• Language: Chinese
• Published: Nanyang Technological University 2021
• Subjects: Humanities::Language::Chinese; Humanities::Linguistics::Syntax
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10356/146908
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

本文以新加坡华语口语语料为材料，对补语标记“得”和“到”进行考察。研究结果显示，新加坡华语补语标记有以下特点：（一）“得”的使用频率高于“到”；（二）“到”能够标记结果补语、状态补语、程度补语和趋向补语，功能比普通话的“到”多元；（三）“得”更常标记状态补语，“到”更常标记结果补语和程度补语；（四）特定形式的结果补语和程度补语只能由“到”引介；（五）只有“得”可以标记可能补语，而只有“到”可以标记趋向补语。此外，本文也将马来西亚华语的“得”和“到”纳入研究作为参照。本文发现，新、马华语的“得”和“到”存在两方面差异：（一）使用频率的差异：“到”作为补语标记在马来西亚华语中的使用频率相比“得”更高，与新加坡华语相反；（二）功能特点的差异：新、马华语“到”标记趋向补语表达的语义有别。此外，马来西亚华语的“到”可以标记可能补语，新加坡华语的“到”不能。本文认为，新、马华语补语标记之所以出现上述差异，是受到方言不同程度的影响以及两地的强势方言不同所致。This study investigates the complement markers de (得) and dao (到) based on spoken Singapore Mandarin Chinese (SMC) corpus data. This study finds that in the context of SMC, the complement markers de and dao exhibit the following characteristics: (a) The usage of de has a significantly higher frequency than dao; (b) Dao in SMC, which can mark result complements, manner complements, degree complements and directional complements, serves more functions than its cognate in Mainland Mandarin Chinese; (c) De is more commonly used as manner complement markers, while dao is more often used as result complement markers and degree complement markers; (d) Certain forms of result complements and degree complements can only be marked by dao; (e) Only de can mark potential complements, while only dao can mark directional complements. In addition, this study also incorporates de and dao in Malaysia Mandarin Chinese (MMC) as a reference. This study finds that among the complement markers de and dao, there are two distinct differences between SMC and MMC, namely (a) frequency: dao is more often used in MMC as a complement marker, which is opposite to that of SMC, and (b) function: the directional complements marked by dao in SMC and MMC express dissimilar meanings. Besides, dao in MMC can function as potential complement markers which is not found in SMC. This study argues that the aforementioned disparities in the complement markers de and dao between SMC and MMC stem from the influences of different dialects in varying degrees.