新加坡华语与普通话常用名量词的对比研究 = A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF COMMONLY USED NOUN CLASSIFIERS IN SINGAPORE MANDARIN AND PUTONGHUA

Abstract

This academic exercise is a comparative study based on cognitive and semantic analysis in the uses of common noun classifiers between Singapore Mandarin and Putonghua, in order to identify some of their major similarities and discrepancies. The classifiers featured, include both shape and non-shape classifiers. Data sources on classifier usage in Singapore Mandarin comprise of a survey conducted on 40 Singaporeans, examples from local Chinese novels and media, namely Chinese newspapers, television programmes and radio broadcasts. These results are compared with prescriptions in traditional Chinese grammar books and classifier dictionaries. The second chapter is a review of past studies on Chinese classifier. Naming of the classifier and sub-categorising it are significant features in the early stages of former studies. Essentially, articles by Chinese grammarians and linguistics in the mid-70s focused on grammatical phenomena and rhetoric, followed by cognitive and semantic discussions in the recent years. The third chapter examines the usage rule of classifiers in Putonghua, forming a basis for comparison in the following chapter. Studies have shown that the primary cognitive basis for shape classifiers is the proportion of abstract extensional dimensions of objects. Comparatively, the relationship between non-shape classifiers and objects is not that semantically transparent, thus preventing users from making active decisions on the choice of classifiers based on the perception of the physical attributes of the objects. Results from this study show that there are overlaps in the usage of classifiers between Singapore Mandarin and Putonghua. Similarities are attributed to a common mother language. On the other hand, differences in culture contexts and languages in contact, especially the influence of the Southern Min dialect in Singapore Mandarin have resulted in some discrepancies. Some obvious examples include the usage of “li” (粒) and “zhi” (支). Evidence from this study has also argued against the saying that Chinese classifier is developing in the direction towards simplicity with the replacement by “ge” (个).