中日同形词的名形句法差异研究
A comparative study on part of speech of the Chinese-Japanese Homographs
许雪华
[摘 要]本文利用语料库考察了《现代汉语词典（第六版）》中为形容词，『新明解国語辞典（第七版）』中为名词的167个中日同形词，发现多数同形词的词性用法与词典标注存在差异，其中汉日语皆为形容词的有72个，汉日语皆为名形兼类的有31个。日语在判定词性时过于依赖形态标准，忽略了实际句法功能，导致许多具有形容词功能的同形词被认定为名词。此外，汉语为名形兼类，日语为名词的有45个。构词语素的性质差异、汉日语中词性用法的历时变化等是造成词性差异的主要原因。还有19个词在日语中无法单独使用，应视作语素，日语使用频率的降低引起了汉日语词性用法的差异。
[关键词]中日同形词 语料库 名词 形容词
Abstract：This corpus-based study investigated 167 Chinese-Japanese Homographs which are tagged as adjectives in Chinese dictionary while they are tagged as nouns in Japanese dictionary.It is found that the usage of most of the homographs are different from the dictionary.There are 72 words which are adjectives and 31 words which are nouns and adjectives in both Chinese and Japanese.Japanese is too dependent on morphological criteria in judging words and neglects the actual syntactic function，resulting that some of the homographs with the function of adjectives are identified as nouns.And there are 45 words which are nouns and adjectives in Chinese while they are nouns in Japanese.The difference in the nature of the morphemes and the diachronic changes in Chinese and Japanese are the main reasons for the dif ference of the words.Moreover，there are 19 homographs which cannot be used alone in Japanese and should be regarded as morphemes.The decrease of the use frequency leads to the difference in Chinese and Japanese.
Key words：Chinese-Japanese Homographs；Corpus；Nouns；Adjectives
中日同形词的差异不仅体现在语义层面，句法功能层面亦有不同，例如“悲哀”一词在汉语和日语中的用法如下：
（1）两被告悲哀地立在墙边。（《厦门日报》1994.8.12）
（2）被圧迫民族の悲哀が、かれの胸に焼きついた。（『海の祭礼』2004）
在例（1）中，“悲哀”作状语，修饰动作“立在墙边”，而在例（2）中则作主语，《现代汉语词典（第六版）》（以下称《现汉》）将其标注为形容词，日语『新明解国語辞典（第七版）』（以下称『新明解』）则将其标注为名词。“悲哀”在汉语和日语中虽然词形相同，词义接近，但其句法功能存在差异。经笔者调查，如“悲哀”一样，《现汉》标注形容词，而『新明解』标注名词的中日同形词有近270个。然而并非所有词都如词典标注那样用法存异，如“绝好”在汉日语中用法基本一致。
（3）上半场葡萄牙队曾有3次绝好的射门机会。（《人民日报》2002.6.6）
（4）店の前にあるガンプのベンチは絶好の記念撮影場所だ。（『アメリカ西海岸』2001）
“绝好”在例（3）和例（4）中都是作定语修饰其后的名词，从句法功能来看，其在汉日语中的用法并无差异。由此看来，《现汉》标注形容词，『新明解』标注名词的同形词在两国语言中，其词性用法是否如词典标注那样存在差异，需要进一步验证。