試析類詞綴“迷”、“控”、“癖”的差異

Abstract

The semantics of characters “Mi”, “Kong”and “Pi”are different in both ancient and modern Chinese. However, as a quasi-affix, they can all represent “people who are fond of something”. The purpose of this paper is to observe and compare them. The conclusion comes out based on BCC corpus. The following five conclusions are obtained through the analysis. 1. In word groups of “X-Mi”, “X-Kong” and “X-Pi”, the primary syllabic structures of “X” are monosyllable structure and disyllable structure. Among three groups of words, “X” in “X-Mi” has most diverse roles. It can be monosyllabic or disyllable nouns, verbs and Adjectives, when it is a polysyllabic word it can be verbs or adjectives. On the other hand, “Kong” as a quasi-affix cannot combine with monosyllabic verbs or polysyllabic verbs and adjectives. “Pi” as a quasi-affix cannot combine with monosyllabic or polysyllabic adjectives. From the use of each group of words, “X-Kong” is the most productive one. Regardless of “X” is any structure of syllable, any part of speech, it has the most amount of use in BCC corpus. Quasi-affix “Pi” can works with different syllabic structures and different kind of words, but in corpus, the use of it is low. 2. When “X” is disyllable word, it has three formations in “X-Mi”, “X-Kong” and “X-Pi”. They are “verb-object from”, “coordinative form” and modification form”. When “X” is polysyllabic word, it in “X-Pi” has the most different word formations; it can be “verb-object form”, “coordinative form”, “modification form” and “supplementary form”. However monosyllabic “X” in “X-Mi” and “X-Kong” only has two formations of above. 3. In sentence, “X-Kong” has the most grammatical roles, it can be Subject, Object, Attributive, Adverbial, and sometimes it even can be Predicate. “X-Pi” can be Subject, Object, Attributive, but “X-Mi” only can be Subject and Object. 4. In semantics, these three quasi-affixes have their own special developed route. The original meaning of “Mi” was “people cannot identify the direction”, through several steps of semantic extensions and under the application of Metonymy, the meaning of quasi-affix “Mi”--“people who are fond of something” is developed. The original meaning of “Kong” was “drawing the bow”, after several semantic extensions and the influence of English loan word “complex”, it received its meaning as a quasi-affix. “Pi” was a noun meant “a lump between ribs”, and extended to “hobby, addiction”; finally under the application of Metonymy it gained the meaning as a quasi-affix. 5. Through Componential analysis, the same sememe of quasi-affixes “Mi”, “Kong” and “Pi” are found, they are [+be fond of something], [+not being rational], [+people who are intoxicated with something]. Because these three quasi-affixes have same sememe, so they can be replaced by each other under some circumstances. However “Kong” has the sememe [+complex] and [+control] its own, “Pi” has the sememe [+morbidity] its own. Therefore, when people express “pervert love”, they will use “X-Pi” other than “X-Mi” or “X-Kong”; when they express “a control desire of love”, they will use “X-Kong”. In terms of writing style and stylistics colors, “Kong” is marked with the sememe [+fashionable], so it mainly used in cyber articles or articles in micro-web. “Mi” and “Pi” can be used in both formal tape of writing and informal tape of writing, but so far “Kong” cannot be used in formal style of writing yet. “Mi” and “Kong” have the sememe [+neutral color of word], but “Pi” has sememe [+derogatory color of word] because of its original meaning was a kind of disease. Last, “Kong” and “Pi” are marked in sememe [+deep emotional degree], but “Mi” is not.