Newsletter No. 393

4 No. 393, 4.3.2012 洞 明 集 2 010年年中，廣州掀起了一連串捍 衞粵語的行動，不少香港人亦感 同身受，桴鼓相應。事緣廣州市政協就 建議增加廣州市營電視台的普通話節 目進行了一次網上問卷調查，隨即引起 了一場粵語存廢的討論。其後有政協更提議以粵語為主的 廣州電視台綜合頻道或新聞頻道改為普通話廣播，遂激起 反對聲音，「撐粵語」運動的序幕由此掀起。及後文化廳把 紀念碑上所刻的明末廣東名將袁崇煥的粵語口頭禪鑿去， 更是火上加油。結果政府領導數度發言安撫，事件才得以 平息。然而，到了去年12月，廣東省政府又公布了一些限制 傳媒使用粵語的政策，看來問題仍在醞釀。 中大中國語言及文學系 鄧思穎 教授是香港有數的研究粵 語語法的學者，他認為粵語已有悠久的歷史，今天在內地 和國外超過五千萬人使用，不會輕易被廢。他反而覺得很 多人甚至學術界對粵語以及漢語方言的性質往往有不少誤 解。他說：「要麼把方言的地位貶得很低，視為不夠文雅， 是土話；不然便把方言抬上半天高，例如把粵語抬舉為高 度發達的語言，甚至認為是保存漢唐語法最多的中國方 言，應該珍如拱璧，諸如此類。身為客觀的研究者，過分的 褒貶一種方言都沒有意思。」 鄧教授認為要了解方言，應該循科學方法，從研究方言的 核心結構着手。以研究粵語語法學為例，入門別無他法，必 須首先掌握中國語文的基本知識，了解漢語的語法特點，在 這個基礎上剖析粵語語法，當能事半功倍。他指出，粵語 和普通話在語法上可能分別不大，例如普通話的「我今天 吃飯」，粵語是「我今日食飯」，但粵語的「食飯啦（讀作陰 平聲〔laa1〕）」、「食飯嘑（讀作陰去聲〔laa3〕）」、「食飯 嗱（讀作陽平聲〔laa4〕）」的三個語氣詞，所表達的意思 已大不同：第一句的語氣有鼓勵或催促的意味，第二句是 邀請或告訴，第三句則是詢問，有一種推測的意思。這類語 氣詞的用法在普通話以至其他中國方言裏非常罕見。 鄧教授解釋，語氣詞屬於後置成分，而後置成分通常放在 動詞之後或句末。例如粵語說「我寫好論文咁滯」，換成普 通話是「我幾乎寫好論文」。「咁滯」是在句末，「幾乎」則 在動詞前。又例如「我淨係飲得一杯茶咋」，普通話是「我 只喝一杯茶」。粵語「淨係」和普通話「只」都屬副詞，在動 詞之前，但粵語還有一個後置的「得」和「咋」。「這是粵語 獨有的，」鄧教授說。「粵語的詞尾、助詞、語氣詞等虛詞 數量特別豐富，形式亦較為複雜。」 鄧教授現時在着手研究粵語的「框式結 構」。他解釋說，粵語除了有大量虛詞 外，其後置成分往往能夠找到對應的副 詞，兩者可以同時出現，形成意義冗餘 的「框式結構」。例如「我差唔多寫好 論文咁滯」，「差唔多」和「咁滯」所表達的其實是同一意 思，但整句說話的語氣加強了。又例如「佢先講先」（「他先 說」），動詞前的「先」屬副詞，而動詞後的「先」屬後置虛 詞，兩者組成框式結構「先……先」，共同修飾動詞「講」。 對於有學者認為以外來的語法分析研究中文是扞格不入， 只會「衍生成為教學方法，演變成為規範自然語言的外在 格律」，鄧教授頗不以為然。他解釋，根據當代語言學的 研究方向，語法研究不應是規範性，因此不會有人為的格 律。語法研究應該是描述性，並用以解釋語言現象，進一 步找出語言的自然「格律」。「從語法學的角度來研究粵 語，就是利用一套科學和客觀的工具幫助我們了解粵語的 結構，」鄧教授說。「只有了解粵語的真面目，我們才可以 為粵語正確定位，證明粵語和其他語言一樣，有嚴謹的組 織。」 I n mid-2010, there were a series of pro-Cantonese protests in Guangzhou that struck a chord in many Hong Kongers who staged similar actions locally. The incident that sparked the controversy was the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference Guangzhou Committee’s proposal to increase Putonghua programmes on Guangzhou Television’s main and news channels. Then the Department of Culture further fueled the furor when it removed the pet phrase of late-Ming military commander Yuan Chonghuan from a memorial tablet. The government authorities had to make repeated attempts to pacify the public before sentiments subsided. Yet in December last year, the Guangdong Municipal Government announced policies limiting the media’s use of Cantonese. The problem is clearly still brewing. Prof. Tang Sze-wing of the CUHK Department of Chinese Language and Literature is one of a few scholars in Hong Kong who study Cantonese grammar. He believes that the dialect will not be phased out easily because of its long history and the fact that it’s currently being used by over 50 million people in China and the world. He thinks however that many people including scholars have misconceptions about Cantonese and Chinese dialects. He said, ‘Dialects either get put down as inelegant or superfluously hailed, such as saying Cantonese is a highly developed language or that the Cantonese dialect has preserved the most Han-Tang grammar. Academics should be more objective.’ Professor Tang believes that dialects should be studied using scientific methods, starting from its core structure. For instance, for ease of understanding Cantonese grammar, one needs to have basic knowledge of the Chinese language and its grammatical features. He pointed out that though Cantonese and Putonghua are not very different grammatically, variations in meaning are given by utterance particles in Cantonese. This usage of utterance particles is very rare in other Chinese dialects. Professor Tang explained that utterance particles are post- verbal elements which usually come after verbs or at the end of sentences, and they are unique to Cantonese. ‘Cantonese is particularly rich in verbal suffixes, particles and utterance particles. Their forms are also more complex.’ Professor Tang is now researching into discontinuous constructions in Cantonese. He explained that besides having many function words, their post-positions often find corresponding adverbs. The two can appear concurrently, forming a meaning-redundant discontinuous construction. Some scholars think it inappropriate to study Chinese using the methods of foreign grammar analysis, but Professor Tang does not agree. He explained that according to the research directions of contemporary linguistics, grammatical studies should not be standardized hence there is no man-made form. He said grammatical studies should be descriptive and should be used to explain linguistic phenomena and to find a language’s natural ‘form’. ‘Using a grammatical studies approach to scrutinize Cantonese means using a set of scientific and objective tools to help us understand the structure of the dialect. It’s only by getting to the bottom of the language that we can accurately position Cantonese and prove that like other languages, it is highly organized.’ 認識方言真面貌  粵語 語法學研究 Understanding the Dialect Cantonese Grammatical Studies 食 飯 啦 〔laa1〕 食 飯 嗱 〔laa4〕 食 飯 嘑 〔laa3〕