ǎoshī”, “Surname + lǎoshī”, Prototype Theory, Prominence Theory, Construction, Open Access Library" />
|
Modern Linguistics 2025
称呼语“老师”和“姓 + 老师”的亲切度差异认知机制阐释
|
Abstract:
本文从认知语言学的范畴观、突显观和构式理论出发,揭示汉语称呼语“老师”与“姓 + 老师”亲切度差异的认知机制。在前人研究基础上,基于北京语言大学BCC语料库、直播场景语料等做定量分析,研究发现:“老师”作为独立范畴具有原型模糊性,倾向于表达平等亲近,亲切度高;“姓 + 老师”通过姓氏突显个体身份,形成距离感,亲切度相对前者较低。在范畴观层面,“老师”的原型特征泛化导致其称谓功能去职业化,而“姓 + 老师”通过姓氏限定维持职业范畴的典型性;在认知突显方面,“老师”突显关系属性,而“姓 + 老师”突显个体社会身份;在构式层面,“姓 + 老师”继承传统称谓构式的规约距离感,“老师”独立构式则衍生出新型互动语义。
Drawing on Prototype Theory view, Prominence Theory, and Construction grammar from cognitive linguistics, this study explores the cognitive mechanisms underlying the intimacy differential between the Chinese address terms “lǎoshī” (teacher) and its modified form “surname + lǎoshī”. Through quantitative analysis of the BCC Corpus and live-streaming interaction data, the research reveals: As an independent category, “lǎoshī” exhibits prototypical fuzziness that facilitates egalitarian closeness and higher intimacy; The “surname + lǎoshī” construction creates social distance through surname modification that highlights individual identity. The categorical analysis demonstrates that “lǎoshī” undergoes de-professionalization via prototypical generalization, whereas “surname + lǎoshī” maintains professional typicality through surname restriction. Cognitively, “lǎoshī” foregrounds relational attributes while its modified counterpart emphasizes social identity. Constructionally, “surname + lǎoshī” inherits conventionalized distance from nominal constructions, whereas the independent “lǎoshī” develops emergent interactional semantics.
[1] | 郭继懋. 常用面称及其特点[J]. 中国语文, 1995(2): 90-99. |
[2] | 韩志刚. 现代汉语社会面称语的组合规则及其功能[J]. 汉语学习, 2001(1): 71-74. |
[3] | 储泽祥. “老小∙姓 + 称谓性指人名词”格式的使用情况考察[J]. 语言文字应用, 2003(3): 29-33. |
[4] | 吴晓君. “姓 + 称呼语”一类结构研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 长沙: 湖南师范大学, 2006. |
[5] | 周慧芸. 对“老师”称谓语泛化的语用解读[J]. 语言与文化研究, 2024, 32(2): 5-7. |
[6] | 孟悦. 称谓语“老师”泛化探因[J]. 汉字文化, 2020(6): 79-80. |
[7] | 武秀文. 称呼语“老师”和“姓 + 老师”的等同量、权势量及语用特点分析[J]. 汉字文化, 2025(1): 194-198. |
[8] | 荀恩东, 饶高琦, 肖晓悦, 臧娇娇. 大数据背景下BCC语料库的研制[J]. 语料库语言学, 2016, 3(1): 93-109+118. |
[9] | Bybee, J.L. (2003) Mechanisms of Change in Grammaticalization: The Role of Frequency. In: Joseph, B.D. and Janda, R.D., Eds., The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Blackwell, 33-35. |
[10] | Talmy, L. (2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics. MIT Press. |
[11] | Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 |
[12] | Goldberg, A.E. (1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press. |
[13] | 刘永厚. 汉语社会称谓语的语义演变[M]. 北京: 知识产权出版社, 2017. |
[14] | Langacker, R.W. (1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Stanford University Press. |
[15] | Croft, W. (2012) Verbs: Aspect and Causal Structure. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199248582.001.0001 |
[16] | 孔子. 论语[M]. 张燕婴, 译注. 北京: 中华书局, 2006. |
[17] | 王力. 汉语史稿[M]. 北京: 中华书局, 1980. |
[18] | Goldberg, A.E. (2006) Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford University Press. |