宋代方位词研究　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 目前方位词的研究多集中在现代汉语领域，近代汉语方面的研究十分薄弱。本文以宋代方位词为研究对象，以描写和解释相结合、定量和定性相结合的研究方法，深入考察该时期汉语方位词的形式系统、语法功能和语义特点，在语法化及认知语法理论的基础上，揭示方位词系统发生演变的内在原因和变化规律，并希望这一历时层面的分析有助于解决今天围绕方位词所产生的分歧。本文的结论是：　　　从整体上看，在核心方位词数量和核心语义保持基本稳定的同时，宋代出现了一些新方位词，方位词的语义也逐渐发生变化，从具体空间语义向抽象语义、时间语义发展。造成这种局面的原因就是方位词的语法化和词汇化。语法化使得原本用在其他词语前面的单音节方位词独立性减弱、修饰功能衰退，大量转化为词内成分；原本后置于其他词语后面的单音节方位词随着语法化程度的加深，方位实指退化、抽象虚指增强，逐渐演化为一种方位标记，方位短语表示方所于是成为近现代汉语的主要表达方式。词汇化催生了大量的以双音节为主的各种复音节方位词，造成了近现代汉语方位词单音节、双音节方位词的两分局面，确立了近现代汉语方位系统的基本面貌。　　　宋代方位词从结构上可以划分为单纯方位词和合成方位词两个不同类型，从音节上可以划分为单音节方位词、复音节方位词两个类型。从出现频率来看，宋代方位词分布很不均衡，相对的方位词之间也存在不对称的现象。 　　　宋代方位词的语法功能的分布顺序为：定语＞宾语＞主语＞状语＞谓语。具体方位词的语法功能分布与语料来源的语体相关，也与文献内容有关。　　　 “X+（之）+L”中L与X的短语结合力排序如下：中＞上＞间＞下＞后＞前／里＞内／外＞东／西／南／北＞边／侧／旁（傍）＞左／右。宋代方位短语担当不同句法成分的能力有大有小，其序列可以具体表述为：宾语（包括介词宾语）＞主语＞状语＞定语＞补语＞兼语＞谓语。其中宾语和主语是方位短语的强势句法功能。方位短语在语句中承担着一定的题元角色。不同的“X+（之）+L”之间的最大公约数的动词有三类：存在语义的动词，位移语义的动词，表示施事行为发生在某处的自主动词。　　　从语义分布来看，我们可以从多到寡依次排列为：具体空间语义＞隐喻空间语义＞时间语义＞等级语义＞虚化语义。从具体的各方位词语义分布范围来看，我们可以依次排列为：上＞内＞下/中＞外＞里/前＞后/间＞左/右/东/西/南/北＞旁/边/侧。方位词的语义与参照物之间有一定的选择性。　　　方位词在宋代经过语法化分化成三个类型：自由不定位型，半自由定位型和粘着后置型。这种语法化是认知因素、高频使用、句法后置共同作用的结果，跨域的语义的分化、泛化和虚化是其表征。宋代所有方位词的语法化程度并不相同，有很大的差异性，主要单音节方位词的语法化程度可以排序为：上＞中＞下＞前/后＞间＞内/里＞外＞边/旁/侧＞东/西/南/北/左/右。

THE STUDY OF THE LOCATIZERS IN THE SONG DYNASTY　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Until now the research on Chinese localizers has focused on the modern Chinese, and the study of Chinese localizers in the Middle-age Chinese is scarce. This dissertation aims to fill this gap in research. Utilizing grammalization and cognitive grammar as the theoretical framework, and combining quantitative and qualitative methods as the research tools, the dissertation attempted to explore the evolution of the localizers and the factors that drove the evolution in the Song Dynasty, in a hope that this diachronic study of the localizers would also help to resolve the many differences regarding the localizers. The main findings of this study are summarized as below:　　　Holistically speaking, while the number and the core semantic meaning of the core localizers remained stable, there came some new localizers in the Song Dynasty. The semantic meaning of the localizers had also changed gradually, from concrete spatial localizers to abstract localizers, and to temporal localizers. The factors driving these changes are grammaticalization and lexicalization of these localizers. In the process of the grammaticalization, the independence of those single syllabic localizers that originally appeared in front of other phrases had weakened, their descriptive function had also reduced. As a result, a great number of the localizers had evolved as affixes of other words, and those single-syllabic localizers originally appeared at the end of other words had evolved as locative markers. This grammaticalization of the localizers had led the dominant use of locative phrase to indicate direction and location in the modern Chinese. Lexicalization of the localizers had produced a number of various multi-syllabic localizers, most of them are disyllabic, which formed the basic profile of the locative system of both the middle-age and modern Chinese. 　　　The localizers in the Song Dynasty can be divided into single localizers and compound localizers structurally, and into single syllabic and polysyllabic localizers phonetically. In terms of frequency, the distribution of the localizers in the Song Dynasty is very uneven, accordingly an asymmetry occurred among the localizers themselves. 　　　The order of the grammatical-functional distribution of the localizers in the Song Dynasty is as this: attributive＞objective＞subjective＞adverbial＞predicate. The grammatical-functional distribution of individual localizers is decided by genres of the data and the content of the texts. 　　　In the structure of “X+（zhī）+L” the order of the tightness between L and X is as this: zhōng＞shàng＞jiān＞xià＞hòu＞qián／lǐ＞nèi／wài＞dōng／xī／nán／běi＞biān／cè／páng（bàng）＞zuǒ／yòu. The ability to function as different syntactic components of the localizers in the Song Dynasty varies and can be placed in this order: objective（including objective of preposition）＞subject＞adverbial＞attributive＞complement＞pilot structure＞predicate, among which objective and subjective are two main syntactic functions of the locative phrases. Locative phrase plays a role of theme in a sentence. The three categories of the most common verbs appeared in “X+（zhī）+L” are: existential verbs, moving verbs, and self-decided verbs. 　　　In terms of semantic distribution, the order from most to lest is as this: concrete spatial semantic>metaphor spatial semantic> temporal semantic>hierarchy semantic>grammaticalized semantic meaning. The distribution of individual localizers can be ordered as this: shàng＞nèi＞xià/zhōng＞wài＞lǐ/qián＞hòu/jiān＞zuǒ/yòu/dōng/xī/nán/běi＞páng（bàng）/biān/cè. The semantic meaning of localizers is selective with their references.　　　The localizers in the Song Dynasty had developed into three types in the course of grammaticalization: free-located, semi-free-located, and post-attached, which is the result of the interaction among cognitive factor, high frequency, and postposition of syntactic components, with the characteristics of semantic division, semantic overgeneralization and grammaticalization across genres. The degree of grammaticalization of the localizers in the Song Dynasty varied greatly. The degree of grammaticalization of the main single syllabic localizers can be put in this order: shàng＞zhōng＞xià＞qián/hòu＞jiān＞nèi/lǐ＞wài＞biān/páng（bàng）/cè＞dōng/xī/nán/běi/zuǒ/yòu.