東漢譯經中做單句或根句主語及各類賓語的第三身代詞“其”

在上古漢語，第三身代詞“其”的主要句法角色是做定語，有時也做從句主語和兼語，但還不能做單句和根句主語以及各類賓語。魏培泉(2004)證明這種格局在東漢被改變，他的用例主要來自漢譯佛經。這在一二十年前沒有人會提出疑問，但現在不同。當本土文獻用例過少時，譯經用例是否在任何時候都可以用來彌補其不足？換句話說，譯經是不是在任何情況下反映的都是漢語的實際面貌？近十年來的佛教漢語研究已經給出了否定的回答。文章認為，東漢譯經中做單句和根句主語以及各類賓語的三稱代詞“其”，應該是譯者的個人言語創新，實質是譯者作為漢語二語學習者的一種偏誤──即他們將有限的漢語知識過度泛化的結果。代詞“其”的句法功能在何時真正有了“語言”上的變化，還是需要本土文獻用例的證明。不過，這種本質上是誤用的創新的確有可能是造成“其”變化的一種原因。數量過少的本土文獻的用例固然不足以證明變化已經發生，但可以說明誤用在本土文獻裡同樣會出現，雖然機制可能不同。比起本土文獻，這種誤用在譯經中顯然更容易發生。越來越多的用例在佛經中出現，客觀上推動或者加快了“其”的變化；從這個意義上說,東漢本土和譯經中的用例，倒也可以視為變化的開始或者濫觴。同時，文章認為，漢語二語習得理論及其偏誤分析，可以為譯經語言的深入研究提供理論工具和方法。
In Old Chinese, the personal pronoun qi 其 mostly performs the attributive function, and it also works as a subject or a pivot in some subordinate clauses. Wei Pei-chuan (2004) shows that qi started to be used as an object or a subject of a simple sentence or a root clause during the Eastern Han dynasty through analyzing the earliest Chinese translation of Buddhist scriptures. This analysis was persuasive decades ago, but now the scholars cast doubts on the feasibility of using Chinese Buddhist translations as the supplement at any time when lacking the literature composed locally. In other words, does the Buddhist translation reflect the actual situation of Chinese of the corresponding period under any circumstance? The study of Buddhist Chinese in the past ten years has given a negative answer. This paper suggests that the usage of qi as an object or a subject of a simple sentence or a root clause in the Eastern Han Buddhist translations is a deviation, created by the foreign translators who learned Chinese as a second language. More specially, the translators overgeneralized their limited knowledge of Chinese when translating Buddhist scriptures. Therefore, the argument of the substantive syntactic change of qi should be supported by literature composed locally. However, the creation, essentially a misuse, of the translator could be a cause of the change of qi. But the misuse also occurred in local texts, albeit they were too few to demonstrate the change of qi. Later, more and more misuses in the translation accelerated the change of qi. In the case, all the examples found in Buddhist translations and local texts could be regarded as the origin of the change. This paper also indicates that the theory about learning Chinese as a second language can provide theoretical tools and methods for the study of Buddhist Chinese. Copyright © 2020 中西書局.