摘要
所有的语言学理论都是为了阐明人类语言的语法的本质。但在回答“什么是语法的本质”这个问题上，便有必要了解“语言是如何获得语法的”，(Bybee,2002)正是对这个问题的关心导致语法化(grammaticalization)研究的兴起和深入，即探讨语法得以建立的过程。语法化指的是实词虚化和相关的语言变化。一些功能主义的语言学家认为，语法演变(包括语法化现象)的发生是由话语交流中某种语用／认知策略促动的，本质上是语言使用的产物；共时平面上的语言变异体现的是历时平面上的语言演变的不同阶段。
时、体系统的发展被认为是体现语法化过程的经典个案。房氏认为，“在语法书所分别诸时当中，有一个时是非常主观的，就是将来时”(1925／1996：151)。接着他就举汉语的“要”和英语的、will,shall为例。王力(1984)认为这一观察是非常准确的。汉语中用能愿式表示将来时，正是因为将来时是非常主观的。Bybee,Perkins&Pagliuca(1994)通过跨语言的历时研究，认为将来时与其说是时间概念，不如说是一个类似于情态的概念，即以施事者为中心的情态(agent-oriented modality)和认知情态(epistemic modality)的概念。将来意义就是说话者对发生在说话时间之后的事件进行预测，除此以外，还包括意愿、意图等。学者(Fleischman,1982;Bybee&Pagliuca,1987;Dahl,1985;Byee,Pagliuca&Perkins,1991)对罗曼语和英语中表示将来意义的成分进行了跨语言的历时研究，得出语法化的假设：所有语言中的将来时间是由少数几个词或结构发展而来，这些词或结构通过了相似的发展路线。具体为：(1)意义为“要”的动词成为将来标记；(2)表示向目标移动的动词或短语在世界各语言中经常演变成为将来标记。本文利用汉语中表示将来意义的成分对上述假设进行验证；同时对英汉语将来时间标志的语法化过程、方式、动因、程度等进行历时平面和共时平面上的比较。
本文的主要任务就是对英汉语中表示将来意义的成分进行历时和共时平面的比较。历时比较表现在这些成分由实义词向功能词的演变，而共时比较主要探讨这些成分相对的语法化程度。
回顾语法化的研究历史，有助于了解前人研究的成果和发展现状，从而
阐明本课题的缘起.本文采用了当前通行的看法，认为语法化研究可分为三
个时期(见第一章):以Meillet为代表的早期研究，从历时的角度进行，将
语法化视为语言演变的一部分;二十世纪七、八十年代的研究，将历时的研
究扩展为共时和类型学研究，将语法化视为解释共时语法的一个参数;二十
世纪八十年代以来的研究，确立了语法化研究的中心地位.前人对表示将来
意义的成分进行的语法化研究，主要采用罗曼语和英语的语料;对英汉语相
关语言现象的语法化的对比研究，也鲜有涉及。本文研究的目的是:结合认
知和语用因素，探讨英汉语中表示将来意义的成分的语法化.
第二章主要探讨一些理论问题并提出本文依据的理论框架:语法化不仅
是一个宏观历时的演变过程，而且还是共时的过程，这两个过程是一致的.
我们可以从认知的角度对语言的历时变化进行分析，同时也要在共时平面上
探讨语境因素。语法化是认知和语用因素相互作用的结果，隐喻和转喻相互
作用，使得语言呈现离散性和连续性的特征。比较英汉语相同、相似或相关
的语言现象的语法化过程、机制、动因、程度，可以验证语法化的相关理论
和假设，以求揭示英汉语的各自特点和普遍规律。
个案研究可以验证、补充和发展语法化的理论和一系列假设，本文分别
在第三章和第四章探讨英汉语将来意义的语法化问题.对英语将来时间标记
的演变，西方学者已经进行了详尽而深入的研究，在此基础上，本文结合语
境因素，对wil珑 hall，be gofngto的语法化过程进行分析，前者由情态动词
演变而来，后者表示向目标移动的短语演变为将来标志。本文以英语情态动
词的分类及其演变顺序为基娜出，即:施事者为中心的情态>认知情态>说话
者为中心的情态，提出了将来意义发展的四个阶段，即，意愿/能力>意图
>预测>可能/命令/条件/让步等.这一假设同样适用于有其它来源的将来
意义，例如向目标移动的动词和短语演变而来的将来意义。
运用汉语语料对表示将来时间的语法化假设进行验证，从而扩展研究范
围，是本文另一个拟解决的问题，以“要/会/将”，“来/去”为代表。前者
由情态动词演变而来，后者表示向目标移动的动词演变为将来标志.本文探
讨这些成分语法化的过程、方式、动因，并对共时平面上的多义现象进行了
历时解释.
卜
语法化在共时平面上的反映就是有些成分的虚化程度高于另一些成分，
(沈家煊，2000)对英汉语语法化的程度进行对比分析，主要通过概念域/
语义之间的对比，提出作者的比较结果;同时运用语料库中包含将来时间标
志的英汉语语言材料进行归纳和分析。分析结果表明，汉语中表示将来时间
的“要/会/将”，“来/去”正经历着由实词向虚词的演变;其中，“要”的使
用频率最高，其次为“会”;相对应的“will”有同样高的使用频率;“来/去”
的使用频率和相对应的“begoingto’，分别为最低，其中，前者的使用频率
又远远低于后者.这正?
A linguistic theory is concerned with the enterprise of elucidating the nature of the grammar of human languages. But along with asking the question "what is the nature of grammar?", we can also ask "how do languages acquire grammar?".(Bybee, 2002) It is the interest of researchers in the latter question that leads to the revival and elaboration of a theory of grammaticalization, that is, to the examination of the process by which grammar is created. Grammticalization refers to the evolution of a morpheme from a lexical to grammatical and other relevant language change. Some functional linguists view that grammar change (including grammaticalization) is motivated by pragmatic/cognitive strategies through human communication, and that language use is an essential factor in the development of grammatical construction; synchronic variation is representative of stages through which diachronic evolution has to go.
Tense and aspect are widely acknowledged in the linguistic literature to represent a classic case of grammaticalization from full verb to function words. Vendryes specifies "Among the tenses differentiated in our grammars, one is eminently subjective, the future." (1925/1996: 151) Then he uses Chinese yao and English will/shall to illustrate his point. Wang Li (1984) thinks of this view as accurate. He believes that Chinese future is derived from optative form just because future is eminently subjective. According to Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca (1994), future is less a temporal category and more a category resembling agent-oriented and epistemic modality, with important temporal implications The focal use of the future is the prediction on the part of the speaker that the event is to occur after the moment of speech. In addition to prediction, future includes willingness, intention, etc. Cross-linguistic study of derivation of futures identifies a universal prototype for future, namely, future from volition
and future from movement.
This thesis aims to test this hypothesis using the Chinese data. On top of that, comparative study of English and Chinese futures is conducted. The comparative study of the grammaticalizational process, manner, degree of futures in these two languages can reveal the mechanism of grammaticalization, hence delineates the respective characteristics as well as the laws of language.
The thesis specifies the main task of the present study: comparative study of futures from diachronic and synchronic perspectives with qualitative and quantitative methodology. The introduction presents definition, scope and studying approach of grammaticalization and the main task of the present study.
In order to have a survey of previous researches about grammaticalization and initiate the present study, Chapter 1 provides the review of previous researches about grammaticalization and then the statement about problem of the previous study. The researches can be divided into three stages:(l) Earlier researches on grammaticalziation represented by Meillet: grammaticalziation was viewed mainly part of diachronic linguistics, as a means of analyzing linguistic evolution; (2) Recent approaches (1970s-1980s), grammaticalization studies were expended from predominantly diachronic approaches to synchronic and typological investigation of linguistic material; (3) Current studies (1980s-now):grammaticalization assumes a significant place as a topic in its own right.
Chapter 2 introduces some theoretical issues and a framework applicable in this thesis: Grammaticalization is a combination process with macro-diachronic and micro-synchronic processes. We can give cognitive interpretation to diachronic change while we have to explore contextual requirements on synchronic level. As a result of interplay of metaphor and metonymy, language is found to be of continuity and discontinuity. A comparative study of the gramamticalizational process, mechanism, motivation and degree of the related grammatical categories in Chinese and English can reveal principles of grammaticalization, atte
引文
Anttila, Raimo. An Introduction to Historical and Comparative Linguistics [M] New York: Macmillan 1972:142
Bybee Joan The Grammaticalization of zero asymmetries in tense and aspect systems[A]in Pauliuca William(ed.) Perspectives on Grammaticalization[C]:John Benjamins: Amsterdam 1994:235-254
Bybee, Joan. Cognitive process in grammaticalization. 2002.On line
Bybee, Joan L.&Willaim Pagliuca. The evolution of future meaning[A]. Papers from the 7th Intermational Conference on Historical Linguistics[C]. A.G. Ramat, O.Carruba& G. Bemini(eds.). Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1987:109-122
Bybee, Pagliuca&Perkins. Back to the future[A], in Traugott and Heine, (eds.).Approaches to Grammaticalization[C]. 1991.Vol. 2:17-58
Bybee,Joan,Perkins,R&Pagliuca, W., The Evolution of Grammar: tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world[M]. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994
Claudi, Ulrike& Bernd Heine. On the metaphorical base of grammar[J]. Studies in Language, 1986,10:297-335
Dahl, Osten. Tense and Aspect System[M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985
Diewald,Gabriele A Modal for Relevant Types of Contexts in Grammaticalizaiton[A]. in Wischer, L&Diewald,(eds.). New Reflections on Grammaticalization[C]. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 2002:103-121
Fleischman, Suzanne. The Future in Thought and Language[M]. Cambridge:University Press, 1982
Givon, T. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: an archaeologist's field trip[J]. Chicago Linguistic Society 7:394-415
Heine, Bernd. On the Role of Context in Gramamticalization[A] in Wischer, L&Diewald,G. (eds.), 2002:83-103
Heine,Claudi&Hurmemeyer. Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework[M].
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991a——From cognition to grammar-evidence from American languages[A], in Traugott and Heine, (eds), 1991b Vol. 1:149-187
Heine, Bernd& Mechthild Reh. Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages[M]. Hamburg: Helmut Buske, 1984
Hopper, J.Paul On Some Principles of Gramamticalizaiton[A] in Traugott and Heine,(eds.), Amsterdam: Benjamins1991, Vol. 1:17-37
Hopper, J.P.&Traugott,C.E.Grammaticalization[M].CambridgeUniversity Press, 1993
Lehmann,C Thoughts on Grammaticalization[M] Munich&Newcastle Lincom Europa, 1995
Matisoff, A. J Grammatization in Lahu[A]. in Traugott. E. C.& B. Heine, (eds.) Approaches to Grammaticalization[C]. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1991, Vol 2:383-454
Palmer, F. R. Mood and Modality[M]. Cambridge: University Press, 1986:51
Quirk,R. et al A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language [M]Longman Group Ltd. London &New York, 1985
Smith, S.Carlota. The Parameter of Aspect [M]. Kluwer Academic Publishers,1991
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition[M].Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Strunk, William, Jr., & E.B. White. The Elements of Style [M] New York:Macmillan. 1972
Sweetser, Eve, From Etymology to Pragmatics-Metaphorical and cultural aspects and semantic structure.[M]Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1990/2002
Traugott,E.C.&Konig.E The semantics-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisited[A], in Traugott, E.C.B.Heine(eds.), 1991,Vol 1:189-219
Ultan, Russel. The nature of future tenses [A]. Universals of Human language[C]
Greenberg et al. (eds),1978: 83-123.
Vendryes, J. Language: a Linguistic Introduction to History [M]. Trans. by Paul Radin. London and New York: Routledge, 1921/1996:137-154
Traugott, E.C. Constructions in Grammaticalization[A] in B. Joseph &R. Janda(eds.) Handbook of Historical Linguistics[C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1996:31-54
Zhao Wanpeng, Gramamticalziation and Modals, Ph.D Thesis. Beijing Normal University. 2000
龚千炎 汉语的时相时制时态[M] 商务印书馆1995
韩峥嵘．汉语虚词手册[M]．吉林人民出版社．1984：177
胡壮麟．语法化研究的若干问题[J]．现代外语．2003，1：85-92
江蓝生．时间词“时”和“後”的语法化[J]中国语文2002，4：291-301
李基安，将来和将来时[J]．外国语．2000，(4)：24-28
刘坚／曹广顺／吴福祥．论诱发汉语词汇语法化的若干因素[J]．中国语文．1995，3：161-169
马建忠．马氏文通[M]．北京：商务印书馆．1983[1898]
马清华．词汇语法化的动因[J]汉语学习2003，4：15-20
牛保义，徐盛桓．关于英汉语语法化比较研究——英汉语比较研究的一个新视角[J]外语与外语教学．2000，9：2-6
潘文国．《汉英语对比纲要》[M]北京：北京语言文化大学出版社2002(第二版)
史存直．汉语语法史纲要[M]上海：华东师大出版社．1986：51-71
石毓智，李纳．汉语语法化的历程—形态句法发展的动因和机制[M]北京：北京大学出版社．2001
沈家煊．“语法化”研究综观[J]．外语教学与研究．1994，(4)：17-24
——．词义与认知—《从词源学到语用学》评介[J]．外语教学与研究．1997，(3)：74-76
——．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
——导读Croft William Typology Universals [M] Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press 2000
孙朝奋．《虚化论》评介[J]．国外语言学．1994，4：19-25
王建伟，苗兴伟．语法化现象的认知语用解释[J]，外语研究2001，2：32-35
王力 王力文集 第一卷 中国语法理论[M]济南：山东教育出版社1984：99-109
——王力文集 第十一卷 汉语语法史 汉语词汇史[M]济南：山东教育出版社．1990：336-357
文旭．《语法化》简介[J]．当代语言学．1998，3：47-48
吴福祥．汉语伴随介词语法化的类型学研究—兼论SOV型语言中伴随介词的两种演变模式[J]中国语文．2003，1：43-58
袁仁林著．解惠全注．虚字说[M]．北京：中华书局．1989：94-96
张济卿．汉语并非没有时制语法范畴[J]．语文研究．1996，4