网络流行语“拿捏”的词义演变探析
An Analysis of the Evolution of the Meaning of the Network Catchword “Nanie”
DOI: 10.12677/ML.2023.119540, PDF,  被引量   
作者: 高倩琳:上海师范大学对外汉语学院,上海
关键词: “拿捏”词义演变流行语“Nanie” Evolution of Word Meanings Catchword
摘要: 12月26日,《咬文嚼字》期刊发布了2022年“十大流行语”,其中,“拿捏”一词频繁出现在在各大社交平台上。经语料考察,该词的现有释义远远多于《现代汉语词典》所列,在不同阶段衍生出了不同新义。本文将“拿捏”一词的演变分为古代(明清时期)、现代(1957年~2017年)、流行(2018年~2022年)三个阶段,在演变过程中,该词的使用频率逐步增加,语义特征整体也发生了变化:由古代的[+故意] [+贬义],经历现代汉语的过渡、转变,进入流行语后变为[+乐意] [+褒义] [+高程度义]。通过对该词不同时期的义项进行梳理和分析,可以了解该词各义项之间的关联、演变路径,从而更好地探究其从较低词频变为网络高频词的演变过程。
Abstract: On December 26th, the journal “Excessive Wording” published the “Top 10 Popular Words” for 2022, among which the term “nanie” frequently appears on various social media platforms. Ac-cording to corpus analysis, the existing definitions of this word are far more than those listed in the “Modern Chinese Dictionary”, and different new meanings have been derived at different stages. This article divides the evolution of the term “nanie” into three stages: ancient (Ming and Qing dyn-asties), modern (1957~2017), and popular (2018~2022). During the evolution process, the fre-quency of use of the word gradually increased, and the overall semantic characteristics also changed: from the ancient [+connotative] [+derogatory], through the transition and transformation of modern Chinese, it entered the popular language and became [+willing] [+commendatory] [+high-level meaning]. By sorting and analyzing the meanings of the term “nanie” in different peri-ods, we can understand the correlation and evolution path between the various meanings of the word, thereby better exploring its evolution process from low word frequency to network high-frequency words.
文章引用:高倩琳. 网络流行语“拿捏”的词义演变探析[J]. 现代语言学, 2023, 11(9): 4018-4025. https://doi.org/10.12677/ML.2023.119540

参考文献

[1] 2022年十大流行语[J]. 咬文嚼字, 2023(1): 4-7.
[2] 田津贺. 拿捏: 一种高程度义表达[N]. 语言文字报, 2022-09-07(第2版). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] 中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室, 编. 《现代汉语词典》(第七版) [Z]. 北京: 商务印书馆, 2016: 931.
[4] 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(1): 93-109, 118.