20世纪书面汉语语言变化——欧化宣言 哲学博士学位论文外文翻译资料

Language change in 20th century written Chinese - The claim for Europeanization

By R Cordes

Dissertation zur Erlangung des Grades einer Doktorin der Philosophie am Fachbereich Asien-Afrika-Wissenschaften der Universitauml;t Hamburg Vorgelegt von Ruth Cordes aus Waiblingen Hamburg 2014

(“The Europeanization of grammar has been an event of great consequence in the history of our language.” (transl. by Alain Peyraube 2000) Wang Li (1944/45)

“Only the grammar of the Chinese language remained remarkably stable amidst all these changes.” Alain Peyraube (2000)

Linguistic – or language – change happens everywhere and at all times, accelerated by social upheavals, though generally slower in written than in spoken language (cf. Gluuml;ck 1993: 590). Whereas linguistic change is on some levels so fast it can be easily observed, like phonetic or semantic change, it is generally rather slow on other levels, like grammar (or morphosyntax). In written language, however, the conservative force of the letter is challenged by the possibility to purposefully prefer the one formulation or structure over the other. Where in spoken language people tend to structure their utterances automatically according to patterns acquired since childhood, they can formulate much more consciously in written language, which means that this would be the area where they experiment with new, fashionable expressions or grammatical structures.

The two contradicting views above, by Wang Li and Alain Peyraube, mark the two extremes in the discussion about the origin and extent of linguistic change in 20th century written Chinese. Wang Li, with his broader notion of 语法 yŭfă – grammar – (including lexicon, stylistics and writing), saw this change as a result of contact with European languages, whereas Alain Peyraube, representing a narrower concept of grammar, found other sources of influence on 20th century written Chinese.

The one point both can agree on is: Written Chinese did change radically since the middle of the 19th century. At the beginning of this process was the highly esteemed Literary Chinese in all variations (or, later, called weacute;nyaacute;n 文言), and the low written Language change in 20th century written Chinese –Colloquial Chinese (later known as baacute;ihuagrave; 白话), which was by traditional scholars considered unfit to express serious contents. The problem was that it took a lot of time to master the literary language, so that huge parts of the society were excluded from literacy. Towards the end of the 19th century, several attempts were made to use a more accessible type of language for newspapers and magazines intended for the reading of larger portions of the society.1 For the sake of alphabetization of former peasants that were needed as industrial workers, and in the attempt to teach people so they could participate in political discussions and thereby constitute a modern nation, means were sought to allow them to learn how to read and write in a shorter time and, above all, in a language that was near to their spoken language.

Several people were occupied with the improvement of written Chinese: Some with the creation of a phonetic writing for Chinese, similar to the Japanese syllabary or using Latin script as a basis, others with the unification of the pronunciation of Chinese characters. In fact, in 1913 a conference was summoned to define the pronunciation of characters. This again needed a phonetic writing system to record these readings. Also the educational system reflected the switch from Literary to Colloquial Chinese as the subject to teach children in school: Since the 1910s, the language taught was called guoacute;weacute;n国文 (national written language), which in 1920 was changed into guoacute;yŭ 国语 (national spoken language; until then, the term “national language”, guoacute;yŭ 国语, referred to the Manju language of the Qing dynasty rulers).

The necessity to reform was felt in nearly every aspect of public life, like the government, educational system, economy and commerce among others (even down to clothing and hairstyle), as well as in language and literature, which in its turn had to serve the modernization. 1 Starting around 1868 (the year of Huang Zunxians “famous line wŏ shŏu xiě wŏ kŏu lsquo;my hand writes as I say with my mouthrsquo;”, Chen 1999: 70) was the movement for the unification of spoken and written language. The role of baacute;ihuagrave; as a means of mass education was highlighted by Qiu Tingliang in 1898: “There is no more effective tool than weacute;nyaacute;n for keeping the whole population in ignorance, and there is no more effective tool than baacute;ihuagrave; for making it wise.” (Tan 1956 cited by Chen 1999: 70) Around the Reform Movement of 1898, baacute;ihuagrave; newspapers, textbooks and dictionaries were published “all around the country” (Chen 1999: 71). Language change in 20th century written Chinese –The country that offered itself as a model was Japan, where large numbers of Chinese students went to study abroad, there coming in contact with Western thought.

Japan wrote with characters similar to Chinese, but complemented by two syllabaries, it had a national language used in public education, and it also had had its own Westernization of the written language as described by Klingspon-Mauml;rz/Yasui in 1979.

At the beginning of the 20th century, some Chinese scholars tried to find the explanation for the supremacy of European colonial powers in the nature of their languages – like the estimation that “Germany is strong, because its language contains many voiced sounds and China is weak because Mandarin lacks them” (Ramsey 1987: 7 about the linguistic knowledge of the delegates of the 1913 conference on pronunciation).

The New Culture Movement, starting at the middle of the 1910s, brought a great leap forward for the creation of a modern standard language meeting the needs of a modern national state. At that time, written Chinese consisted, according to Chen Ping (1999: 76) of these fo

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

20世纪书面汉语语言变化——欧化宣言

哲学博士学位论文

R Cordes

汉堡大学

亚非学院

2014，汉堡

“文法欧化，是语法史上的一桩大事。”——王力（1944/45）

“在所有语言变化中，只有汉语保持稳定。”——Alain Peyraube （2000）

语言变化无处不在，随时随地加剧着社会动荡（参见格鲁克1993：590）。尽管某些层面上的语言变化十分迅速（如语音或语义），且很容易观察到，但另外一些层面上的语言变化则相当缓慢（如语法或形态语法学）。然而在书面语言中，语言学保守派则会遇到来自这样一种可能性的挑战——即有意偏好某一种方式或结构。人们倾向于在口头语言中构建语言并根据从小习得的模式自动发声，在此过程中还能更自觉地公式化书面语言，这意味着他们会在书面语言中尝试崭新、时尚的表达或语法结构。

上述中，王力和阿兰·佩劳伯的两个相互矛盾的观点，标志着两人对20世纪语言变化起源、范围的讨论中的两个极端。在接触欧洲语言时，王力借助其广泛的语法知识（包括词汇，文体学和写作） 觉察到了这种变化；而阿兰·佩劳伯则代表一个更狭义的语法概念，她发现了20世纪其他汉语的影响源。

但两者都可以在这一点上达成一致：自19世纪中叶之后，书面汉语就发生了根本性的变化。这个过程开端之时，各种文言文变体和白话文受到高度尊重，但在传统学者眼中则不适合表达严肃内容。问题在于，掌握文言文需要花费大量时间，因此社会中一大部分人都目不识丁。直到19世纪，为促进大众阅读，人们做了一些努力和尝试，在报刊和杂志中使用了一种更易接受的语言。农民根据需要变成工人，而他们要开始学习拼音、同时也尝试教授别人拼音，好参与政治讨论、建设现代国家，因此人们找到方法让他们在短期之内学会了读写与口语相近的表达。

少数人开始忙于改造书面语言：一些人参与创造汉语拼音文字，这种拼音文字和日语假名表很相似，或者干脆采用拉丁文本作为参考；另一些人则致力于统一汉字发音。事实上，1913年时中国国内就已经召开了一次会议确定汉字发音。这又需要拼音书写系统来记录文本。此外，教育制度也反映出文言文到白话文的转变，学校把白话文纳入课程教育孩子。1910-1919年间，学校里的白话文课程叫做“国文”，而1920年则变成“国语”（在此之前，“国语”指的是清朝统治者所用的满族语）。

整个社会在公共生活的各个方面，例如政府机关、教育制度、经济和商贸、语言文学等等（甚至包括国民穿着和发型），都感受到了改革的必要性，这种必要性转而又为现代化服务。

日本可以作为一个范例。大量的中国学生前往日本留学，得以接触西方思想。日本文字与汉语相近，但有片、假名表作为补充。作为一门国语，日本文用于公共教育，而根据Klingspon-Mauml;rz/Yasui（1979），日语书面文字中也存在西化现象。

20世纪初，一些中国学者试图从语言中为欧洲殖民力量的优越性寻求解释，例如，她们认为“德国强大，是因为德语中有许多浊音；而中国贫弱，是因为普通话中缺少浊音。”（Ramsey 1987.7: 关于“1913语音会议”与会代表的语言学知识）

1910年-1920年中期掀起的新文化运动为创造一门符合现代国家需求的现代化标准语言带来了巨大的飞跃性进展。与此同时，陈平（1999：76）认为，书面汉语由以下四个种类构成：

（1）传统文言文（白话文反对者的主要书面语言）

（2）现代文言文（吸收了大量日语外来词和现代方言词汇）

（3）传统白话文（清代方言文学作品传下来的语言）

（4）新型白话文（语法层面大量借鉴西方语言）

（5）新型白话文是1910年代知识分子的书面用语。当时，这些知识分子正在狂热地寻找一种全新的语言来表达现代新文学中的新思想。陈平（1999：72）写道：

“虽然几十年前类似的提议也出现过，但这种提议都是因为胡适、陈独秀、刘半农、钱玄同和傅斯年这些人在社会快速变革的大环境中进行了热忱、有力的宣传才得以产生。他们确信僵化陈腐的文言文不能成为生机勃勃的文学的媒介。”

这些知识分子中，一些人认为汉语（以及传统的中国社会）几乎无药可救，其中最为极端的代表是钱玄同，他在写给《新青年》杂志编辑陈独秀的信中推崇全面废除汉语，用世界语作为替代。其他人则试图通过“改造”汉语语法来让汉语变得现代化，这些人中包括王力。我认为最有趣的一点是，王力曾于1944年发表著作阐述西化汉语语法，但在大概十年之前，他却试图通过标记词类将同样的语法进行欧化。1954年，在他阐释欧化语法十年后，他仍旧写道：“报刊杂志上大多数的佳作都可以字对字、句对句地翻译成俄语或英语，基本上不用改变结构。”

所有这一切要达到的目标是创设一门语言，使其既适于表达一切从西方世界传到中国来的新思想（其中一部分通过日本传来）、同时也能满足现代国家需求的语言。另一方面，西方语言也对汉语产生了巨大的影响，主要通过英语、法语、俄语、德语和其他欧洲语言翻译过来的书面文本来施加这种影响，在现代汉语中留下了些许痕迹，也就是众所周知的翻译腔。著作者若追求忠实，便会注意到上述的一些语言变化，但还有一些语言变化是无意识产生的，而时间紧张或能力欠缺催生了蹩脚的逐字翻译。

因此一些知识分子忙于改造他们心中不适用于现代的书面汉语。同时，1920年代便已有人发声提出对汉语欧化的警告，比如说1928年的柯。

现在我想回到文章开头，回到王力于1944年和阿兰·佩劳伯于2000年提出的两大论题。最主要的问题是：两人谁是对的？或者说错误之处更少？

在我的论文中，我会研究这两位语言学家（以及在二人所在年代之间发表著作的语言学家）谁是正确的。是王力对欧化这一受人追捧的现象带有偏见的观点？还是佩劳伯对语法更为狭义的理解及他对书面汉语历史影响的看法？不同的语言学家对书面汉语语法变化做了什么样的描述？除了欧化的影响外，日语或汉语方言又对汉语语法施加了什么影响？

欧洲语言，尤其是英语，是否对书面汉语施加了强大影响、改变了它的词法和句法，在学者讨论中引起了争议。汉语接触英语、法语或德语产生的变化却可能源于其与早先汉语其他变体或其他非汉语语言的接触。

不过，Heine 和Kuteva（2005）却指出，事实并非像我们先前假设的那样，“不同语言间语法意义和结构的转换是惯常的，这一转换由语法变化的通用过程塑造。”她们列出了：

语言转换的种类：

(a)形式，即语音和语音组合

(b)意义（包括语法意义或语法功能）或意义组合

(c)形式——意义单位或形式——意义单位组合

(d)句法关系，即意义成分的顺序

(e)a、b、c、d的任何一种结合体

20世纪上半叶早起，欧化呼声很高——傅斯年在1919年首次提出西化要求，而诸如Hertze Ke的著作者则提出了反对（Hertze Ke在1928年提出反对意见）。但这一切至今还未得到系统研究。第一个对此进行研究的是王力，他在1944欧化语法一书中用了两个章节来研究这一论题。在他之后，其他人则像第二章、第三章里所示的那样将欧化作为调查主题。

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[24502]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word