关于“レてもぃぃ”与“レてぃぃ”的意义分析

发布时间：2018-08-15 15:23

【摘要】：日语中的“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”都是表示许可、容忍的复合句型。《日语句型词典（2002）》指出“动词+てもいい”有表示许可、可能性和提议等三种用法；而“动词+ていい”有表示许可的用法，这点虽然与“动词+てもいい”表示许可时的意思相同，不过只能用于口语。但是仅仅依据句型词典的解说并不能很好区分两者的用法。本文在参考先行研究的基础之上，通过大量举例，分别对“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”的意义使用进行了详尽的考察。为了掌握两者的意义区别，笔者首先通过事态可控性、行为执行人、行为决定权以及主观容忍和客观容忍等要素，依次分析“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”各自的意义用法。当该事态为可控事态时，“シテモイイ”有以下用法。 ①当动作执行者是听话人，而决定权在说话人手中时，表示说话人允许听话人实施该行为。 ②当动作执行者是听话人，且决定权也在听话人手中时，既有说话人请求听话人实行该行为的用法，也有向听话人提议实施该行为的用法，还有对听话人未实施此行为而表示不满的用法。 ③当动作执行者是说话人，且决定权也在说话人手中时，说话人表明自己执行此行为的态度，或者承诺执行对方要求的或提议的行为。 ④当动作执行者是说话人，而决定权在听话人手中时，该文可用于说话人自发提出做某事，或者请求对方允许自己做某事。当该事态是不可控事态时，“シテモイイ”文表示对该事态的容忍，依据容忍的程度，可以分为主观容忍、客观容忍和客观可能性的用法。其次是“シテイイ”的用法。当该事态为可控事态时，“シテイイ”有以下用法。 ①当动作执行者是听话人，而决定权在说话人手中时，说话人对听话人的行为给予肯定评价，并允许听话人实施该行为。 ②当动作执行者是听话人，且决定权在听话人手中时，有说话人向听话人请求做某事的用法和提议听话人做某事的用法。 ③当动作执行者是说话人，而决定权在听话人手中时，说话人以疑问句的形式请求听话人允许自己实施该行为。当该事态是不可控事态时，既有说话人对该事态表达主观容忍的用法，又有对符合社会规范的人为不可控的事态表示客观容忍的用法。为了进行两者的对比分析，笔者以母语为日语的人群为对象进行了问卷调查。最后在前文分析的基础上，参考问卷调查的结果，以两者可否置换为标准，将两者的用法分为可置换场合与不可置换场合，也就是相似部分与相异部分，然后一一分析。对比分析的结果如下所示。 ⑴相似部分 ①在表示许可时，“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”都可以使用，只是两者有语感上的不同。那就是“シテイイ”更能表示对某事积极认可的态度。 ②在表示请求许可的句子中，“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”两者可以相互替换。不过与“シテイイ”相比，“シテモイイ”更能表示委婉询问的语感。 ③要求听话人执行某行为的场合，也就是请求应允的场合，两者可以置换。在这种情况下，“シテモイイ”的使用范围更为广泛。 ④说话人提议或劝说听话人做某事时，“シテモイイ”和“シテイイ”都可以使用，不过使用“シテモイイ”时，很多时候会使用“してもいいと思う”的形式。 ⑤表示主观容许的场合中，说话人对不可控事态表明“无可奈何而认可”的态度时，两者都可以使用，只是使用“シテモイイ”会产生消极的语感。再者，说话人对人为力量不能控制的客观事物表达容忍的态度时，“シテモイイ”与“シテイイ”都可以使用。 ⑥在表示基于客观社会规范上的容许的用法中，两者都可以使用，“シテモイイ”的用法相对广泛，如果句中有不定语的话那就只能用“シテモイイ”。 ⑵相异部分 ①如果表达提议或劝说的句中，若动作执行者是包含听话人在内的“我们”，就只能使用“シテモイイ”。 ②“シテモイイ”有说话人对听话人或者第三人称未做某事而表示不满的用法，，这种情况下若替换为“シテイイ”的话，句子会变得不自然。 ③说话人在表达自己实施某行为的决心、意愿时更多使用“シテモイイ”。 ④“シテモイイ”有应允实施对方要求的动作的用法。这种应允里面常常可以体会到消极的语感，而“シテイイ”缺少这种语感。 ⑤说话人自发地提出进行某行为，而此行为一般是听话人所期待或者对听话人有利的，这样的句子里往往使用“シテモイイ”。 ⑥使用“シテモイイ”的句子中，谓语动词以被动形态出现，表明说话人受到他人的动作、自然状况或者社会现象的影响的时候，往往表示说话人“无所谓、随便”等的容忍的态度。此外还有以疑问句的形式征求听话人“主观容许”的用法。这些句子里都难以替换为“シテイイ”。 ⑦在表示客观可能性的时候，可以使用“シテモイイ”，但是很难使用“シテイイ”。
[Abstract]:The Japanese Dictionary of sentence patterns (2002) points out that "verb + The meaning of permission is the same, but it can only be used in spoken English. However, the use of the two can not be well distinguished only by the dictionary of sentence patterns.
On the basis of referring to previous studies, this paper makes a detailed study of the meaning and use of 24
In order to grasp the difference between them, the author first analyzes the meanings and usages of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
When the situation is controllable, there are the following uses.
(1) When the action executor is the hearer and the decision is in the speaker's hands, it means that the speaker allows the hearer to perform the act.
(2) When the executor of the action is the hearer and the right of decision is in the hearer's hands, there are not only the usage of the speaker requesting the hearer to perform the act, but also the usage of proposing the act to the hearer, and the usage of expressing dissatisfaction that the hearer did not perform the act.
(3) When the action executor is the speaker and the right of decision is in the speaker's hands, the speaker indicates his attitude towards the act or his commitment to the act requested or proposed by the other party.
(4) When the action executor is the speaker and the decision is in the hearer's hands, the article can be used to ask the speaker to do something spontaneously or to ask the other party to allow him to do something.
When the state of affairs is uncontrollable, the article "_" expresses tolerance for the state of affairs, which can be divided into subjective tolerance, objective tolerance and the use of objective possibility according to the degree of tolerance.
The second is the usage of "Pun".
When the situation is controllable, the following usage is used.
When the action executor is the hearer and the decision power is in the speaker's hands, the speaker gives a positive evaluation of the hearer's behavior and allows the hearer to perform the behavior.
(2) When the executor of the action is the hearer and the decision is in the hearer's hands, the speaker asks the hearer to do something and suggests the hearer to do something.
(3) When the actor is the speaker and the decision is in the hearer's hands, the speaker requests the hearer's permission to perform the act in the form of interrogative sentences.
When the state of affairs is uncontrollable, there is both the speaker's subjective tolerance for the state of affairs and the objective tolerance for the uncontrollable state of affairs in accordance with social norms.
In order to make a comparative analysis of the two, the author conducts a questionnaire survey on Japanese native speakers. Finally, on the basis of the previous analysis and referring to the results of the questionnaire survey, the author divides the usage of the two into substitutional occasions and irreplaceable occasions, that is, similar parts and different parts, and then one One analysis. The results of comparative analysis are as follows.
A similar part
(1) Both \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
(2) In the sentences expressing the request for permission, the words \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
(3) Where the hearer is required to perform an act, i.e. where the consent is requested, the two can be substituted. In this case, the use of
(4) When the speaker proposes or persuades the hearer to do something, both \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
_In situations where subjective permission is expressed, the speaker can use both of them when he or she expresses his or her attitude toward uncontrollable events that he or she has no choice but to approve of them. However, the use of225 They can be used.
(1) Both of them can be used to express the permissible usage based on objective social norms. The usage of \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
2. Dissimilar parts
If the expression of a proposal or persuasion is "we" including the hearer, the action executor can only use "
(2) There is a usage of "
(3) when the speaker expresses his determination and willingness to carry out an act, he will use more words.
(4) There is a usage of "
_The speaker spontaneously proposes to perform an act, which is generally expected by the hearer or beneficial to the hearer. In such sentences, "_" is often used.
_In the sentence of, the predicate verb appears in a passive form, indicating that when the speaker is affected by the actions of others, natural conditions or social phenomena, he often expresses the speaker's tolerant attitude of 225 Usage. These sentences are hard to replace.
When expressing the objective possibility, we can use
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：H36

【相似文献】