英汉确量构式的语义、句法及语义演变
The Semantics, Syntax, and Semantic Change of English and Chinese Exact-Quantity Constructions
摘要: 本文以英语确量构式“ten to one”与汉语“十有八九”为研究对象，基于EEBO、COHA、COCA以及CCL等语料库，从共时与历时两个维度系统考察它们的语义、句法及演变路径。基于隐喻化与主观化，研究发现它们遵循“确量 > 约量 > 认识情态”的语义扩展规律，同时也遵循“客观 > 主观 > 交互主观”的单向性规律。与此同时，构式的形式与意义的不匹配促使其在句法层面发生左迁移，从而获得新的语义功能。进一步比较发现，相较于英语确量构式，汉语确量构式的语义演变主要受除数词构件虚化的驱动，更易表达认识情态。
Abstract: This paper examines the English exact-quantity constructions “ten to one” and its Chinese counterpart “shiyoubajiu”, drawing on corpora such as EEBO, COHA, COCA, and CCL. From both synchronic and diachronic perspectives, it investigates their semantics, syntactics, and paths of semantic extension. The study shows that, through processes of metaphorization and subjectification, these constructions follow the same path of semantic extension “exact quantity > approximate quantity > epistemic modality”, as well as the unidirectional regularity “objective > subjective > intersubjective”. Meanwhile, the mismatch between form and meaning within the constructions has led to a leftward syntactic shift, whereby they acquire new semantic functions. A further comparison reveals that compared with the English exact-quantity construction, the semantic extension of the Chinese exact-quantity construction is mainly driven by the grammaticalization of its numeral components, making it more likely to express epistemic modality.
文章引用：杨梦婷, 程丽霞. 英汉确量构式的语义、句法及语义演变[J]. 现代语言学, 2026, 14(2): 267-276. https://doi.org/10.12677/ml.2026.142139

参考文献

[1] 李宇明. 汉语量范畴研究[M]. 武汉: 华中师范大学出版社, 2000.
[2] 夏军. 论虚量和实量——兼论其与约量、确量的关系[J]. 语文研究, 2015(1): 11-17.
[3] Nuyts, J. (2001) Epistemic Modality, Language, and Conceptualization. John Benjamins Publishing Company. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[4] Traugott, E.C. and Dasher, R.B. (2001) Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[5] 董正存. 汉语中约量到可能认识情态的语义演变——以“多半”为例[J]. 中国语文, 2017(1): 63-73+127.
[6] 董正存. “不折不扣”与“十足”的用法及其语义演变路径[J]. 中国语文, 2024(2): 144-152+254.
[7] 姜其文. 现代汉语情态构式研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 杭州: 浙江大学, 2018.
[8] 颜刚. “八成”: 数量、程度、情态[J]. 汉语学习, 2020(1): 103-112.
[9] 董秀芳. 量与强调[M]//徐丹, 主编. 量与复数的研究——中国境内语言的跨时空考察. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2010: 312-328.
[10] 王擎擎, 金鑫. “百分之百”类词语从数量短语到副词的演变[J]. 求索, 2013(3): 165-167.
[11] 董正存. 结构省缩与情态依附——以让步条件结构式为例[J]. 世界汉语教学, 2016, 30(4): 456-469.
[12] Traugott, E.C. and Trousdale, G. (2003) Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford University Press.
[13] Matthews, P.H. (2014) The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Linguistics. Oxford University Press.
[14] (2024) Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press.
[15] 王文斌, 张媛. 主观化视角下的“有”义及其用法探讨[J]. 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), 2019, 42(5): 2-12.
[16] Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (2008) Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.
[17] 沈家煊. 实词虚化的机制——《演化而来的语法》评介[J]. 当代语言学, 1998(3): 41-46.
[18] Traugott, E.C. (1989) On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change. Language, 65, 31-55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[19] Closs Traugott, E. (2010) (Inter)Subjectivity and (Inter)Subjectification: A Reassessment. In: Davidse, K., Vandelanotte, L. and Cuyckens, H., Eds., Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization, de Gruyter Mouton, 29-74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[20] 沈家煊. 语言的“主观性”和“主观化” [J]. 外语教学与研究, 2001, 33(4): 268-275+320.
[21] Arbib, M.A. (2012) Compositionality and Beyond: Embodied Meaning in Language and Protolanguage. In Hinzen, W., Machery, E. and Werning, M., Eds., The Oxford handbook of compositionality, Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[22] Levinson, S.C. (2000) Presumptive Meanings. The MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]