【作者】 解海江；

【导师】 李如龙；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 汉语言文字学， 2004， 博士

【摘要】 编码度本来是为证明语言相对论而概括不同语言间词汇差异的术语，文章把它发展成一种跨语言词义对比研究的理论模式，它兼取结构主义语义学对义位宏观和微观结构分析之长及认知语义学解释性的优点，能够有效揭示跨语言词义系统差异，并据此研究语言与思维的关系、语言与文化的关系及不同语言编码度和词化程度的关系、不同语言编码度与理据饱和度的关系，对二语教学、双语词典编撰和翻译等方面也有重要的理论和实践意义。文章对汉英亲属、颜色、拟声、服装、味觉和烹饪等语义场及汉语古今颜色、马、祭祀、洗涤等语义场和汉语方言颜色、笋、白天等语义场编码度进行对比分析。在跨语言语义场的关系方面，认为跨语言语义场的编码度表现在纵和横两个方向上。纵的方面，首先表现为语义场划分的层级不同，其次划分出的层级义场不一致：还会出现义位空缺或语义场空缺。横的方面，首先表现为语义场的划分不同，有的的语义场还存在着交叉现象。其次底层义场切分出的义位多少不同。跨语言语义场中义位的关系，一方面表现为语义场分类的不同层级上出现义位空缺。另一方面跨语言语义场中义位可能完全对应或部分对应或完全不对应。文章认为编码度与词的理据有关系，为了反映这种关系我们提出语义场“理据饱和度”的概念。并提出了两条相关定理，认为编码度与语义场理据饱和度成正比关系。文章还从语言相对论、认知假设和语言普遍现象讨论编码度与思维的关系。从感性范畴中的颜色词和基本范畴词看，人类在认知上既存在共性，同时由于不同民族所处的自然和文化环境的差异，不同民族语言也存在着自己的独特个性。文章以丰富材料驳斥了汉语词汇贫乏论。在不同语言词化程度与语言编码度的关系上认为，词化程度与编码度是成正比的；并提出跨语言词化程度比较的方法。我们还发现在汉语编码度的历时变化中存在语化现象，并提出考察语化的方法。更多还原

【Abstract】 Codability is a term with that tests the linguistic relativity, this paper expands it into a theory pattern that is used to semantic contrast between languages. Theory of codability has the merits of the structural semantics and cognitive semantics, it be good for opening out the difference of semantic system between languages. We can use it to study the following questions: the relation of language and thought, the relation of language and culture, the relation between degree of lexicalization and codability, the relation between saturation of motivation and codability. With it, we can study the following questions: second language teaching, bilingual dictionary compilation, translation. This paper contrasts the following semantic fields: kinship, colour, onomatopoeia, clothes, taste and cooking between English and Chinese; colour, horse, sacrifice and washing between classical Chinese and mandarin; colour, bamboo shoot and daytime between Chinese dialects. The differences of semantic fields between languages represent in two aspects: the vertical aspects and the across aspect. In the vertical aspects, firstly, semantic fields are carved up different levels between languages; secondly, level semantic fields are not parallel; and there is glosseme gap or semantic fields gap. In across aspect, firstly, semantic fields are carved up differently between language, there is intercross in some semantic fields between language; secondly, the number of glosseme is different in lower level semantic fields between languages, there is glossemes gap in level of the semantic fields between languages. The relation of glossemes in the semantic fields between languages : completely correspondent, or partly correspondent, or noncorrespondent. We think that motivation is correlative with codability, so we bring forward the notion saturation of motivation in semantic field, and bring forward two relative theorem, and think there is the direct proportion between codability and saturation of motivation in semantic field. The paper researches the relation between codability and thought from the linguistic relativity, cognitive hypothesis and linguistic universals. The paper refutes the theory of lexical scanty in Chinese in rich datum. Degree of lexicalization is correlative with codability between languages, there is the direct proportion between codability and degree of lexicalization in semantic field, and bring forward the method in that contrast the degree of lexicalization between languages. This paper bring forward a phenomenon: phrasalization in the diachronic evolution of Chinese codability, and show a way in that research phrasalization.更多还原