“近代汉语指代词的音变都不怎么合乎规律”吗?  

Do sound mutations in modern Chinese demonstrative pronouns follow no inherent rules?

作　　者：张卫东[1] 

机构地区：[1]深圳大学文学院,广东深圳518060

出　　处：《深圳大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2013年第1期148-155,共8页Journal of Shenzhen University：Humanities & Social Sciences

基　　金：广东省<〈伍伦全备谚解〉所记音系研究>(02G90);教育部<朝鲜文献与近代汉语音韵史研究>(01JD740004);国家哲学社会科学基金项目<〈老乞大〉多版本语言学比较研究>(02BYY029)

摘　　要：梅祖麟先生1986年评吕著《近代汉语指代词》时提出一个观点:"近代汉语指代词的音变都不怎么合乎规律"。支撑这一论断的是所谓"合音"说。然"合音"说既有悖于汉语音韵传统,亦不获汉语方言学支持,更将假借字当"真"(本字),在近代汉语史上只说旧质承继,不见新质产生。近代汉语指代词的语音及其音变,是有其规律的,今普通话指代词系统的词形和语音,是近代汉语历史演进、各大方言"准通语"相互激荡而成的自然结果,毋须动辄以"非汉语影响"来说事。In a 1986 critical response to Lv Zhuo＇s Demonstrative Pronouns in Modern Chinese, Mei Zulin holds forth his own view： phonological variations in modern Chinese demonstrative pronouns do not seem to follow any （internal） rules.＂ The main pivot on which Mei stakes his claim is the so-called ＂sound-assimilation＂ theory. However, ＂sound-assimilation＂ goes against the tradition in Chinese phonology and not only is unsupported by Chinese dialectological studies but treats the replacement words （tong jia zl） as the originals they were intended to indicate. This theory only emphasizes inheritance of and continuity with the old elements within the Chinese language, as though in and of itself Chinese is incapable of producing new elements. All too often, this theoryquickly attributes new phonological elements in Chinese to influences from foreign languages. However, phonological variations in modern Chinese demonstrative pronouns show that they follow inherent rules. Even the sounds and shapes of the demonstrative pronouns in today＇s Mandarin （pu tong hua） is the result of interplays and interactions among China＇s major dialects and the quasi-official （regional） Chinese （s） or zhun tong yu prevalent in the several major phonological and geographical divisions in China. There is certainly no need to exaggerate non-Chinese influences on the trajectory of phonological changes in Chinese.

关 键 词：近代汉语指代词 音变 “合音” 假借字 “准通语” 

分 类 号：H11[语言文字—汉语]