本研究探討中文第三人稱代名詞「他」的言談語用功能與語法化現象。文中指出，「他」在口語中具有典型正規的(canonical)功能和非典型(non-canonical)的功能。在正規的用法中，「他」的使用完全是由於指稱需要(referential needs)，用來指代語境中非說話者，亦非受者話的第三者。然而，在非典型用法中，「他」的使用不全然是由於指稱需要，而是說話者基於句法上(syntactic)、言談篇章上(discourse)、及情態表達上(expressive)的考量結果。「他」可能是句法結構上的填補詞(a structural filler)，或在篇章上扮演切割或強調的功能，或是具有擬人化、表達說話者對立態度、或客觀轉述的態度的情意功能。在這些非典型的用法中，「他」可能並未完全喪失原來的指稱功能，但此時所稱代的不一定是人，而可能是事或物，並且單、複數皆可。這些尚具有部分指稱功能的非典型的「他」的用法再更加虛化之後，即成為非指稱的用法(non-referential uses)，純粹表達說話者客觀或超然的態度。另外，文中並指出，在不同的上下文中，「他」所呈現的多樣功能彼此之間並非毫無關連。非指稱的用法應是由「他」的基本語意，即指稱語境中的第三者，所延伸而來。這些功能的演變過程，揭示了「他」由命題(propositional)功能轉向表態(expressive)功能，由陳述外在客觀的環境(objective)轉向描寫內心主觀世界(subjective)，及由實(concrete)轉虛(abstract)的虛化(grammaticalization)過程。

The present study examines the discourse-pragmatic functions and the grammaticalization of the Mandarin third person pronoun ta. It is found that the pronoun performs canonical and non-canonical functions in authentic spoken discourse. In its canonical uses, ta is motivated by referential needs, and is used to refer either anaphorically or deictically to a human referent that is neither the speaker nor the addressee. In non-canonical uses, however, ta is motivated not by referential needs, but by syntactic, discourse, or expressive considerations. It serves as a structural filler, performs the discourse functions of demarcation or highlighting, or the expressive functions of personification, showing an antagonistic attitude or reporting a quoted message in an objective way. Although in these non-canonical uses, ta may still retain a certain level of referentiality, it does not necessarily refer to a human referent, and the lack of number agreement between the pronoun and its referents is often observable. These referential yet non-canonical uses of ta paves the way for the evolvement of the metalinguistic uses of non-referential ta that are employed exclusively for expressive functions of marking the objectivity or the detached attitude of the speaker. Besides, all the functions performed by ta in different contexts are not unrelated. The non-referential ta is believed to be an extension from ta’s basic referential meaning of denoting a third person in a speech situation. And the development of all the various functions illustrates the grammaticalization from propositional to expressive, from objective to subjective, from concreteness to abstractness that the pronoun ta undergoes.

王力. 1985【1955初版】. 中國現代語法. 北京：商務印書館.
------. 1989【1947初版】. 漢語語法史. 北京：商務印書館.
王松茂等. 1983. 漢語代詞例解. 北京：書目文獻出版社.
王海棻. 1991. 馬氏文通與中國語法學. 安徽教育出版社.
朱德熙. 1982. 語法耕讀. 北京：商務印書館.
呂叔湘. 1980. 現代漢語八百詞. 北京：商務印書館.
---------. 1982. 中國文法要略. 北京：商務印書館.
---------. 1992. 呂叔湘文集 第三卷. 北京：商務印書館.
---------. 1985. 近代漢語指代詞. 上海：學林出版社.
李櫻 陳秋梅 林敏靜. 1998. 台灣閩南語言談標記a試析. 第二屆台灣語言國際研討會論文選集. 151-66.
邱妙津. 2000. 稱代詞「人家」的語意及語用研究. 台灣師範大學碩士論文.
胡裕樹. 1992. 現代漢語. 增訂版 台北：新文豐出版
徐丹. 1989. 北京口語中非指人的‘他(它)’. 方言第一期, 7-8頁
章士釗. 1935. 中等國文典. 北京：商務印書館.
孫德金. 1996. 代詞的範圍及其再分類. In 詞類問題考察 胡明揚 主編. 北京語言文化大學出版社 347-63.
馬建忠. 1898. 馬氏文通. 上海：商務印書館. (1935再版)
張伯江 方梅. 1996. 漢語功能語法研究. 江西教育出版社.
趙元任. 1968. 中國話的文法. 香港：中文大學出版 （丁邦新譯本1994）
劉月華等. 1996. 實用現代漢語語法. 台北：師大書苑.
Ariel, M.. 1990. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.
Biq, Yung-O. 1990. The Chinese third-person pronoun in spoken discourse. Papers from the 26th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society: 61-72.
---------------. 1991. The multiple uses of the second person singular pronoun ni in conversational Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 16: 307-21.
Bybee, Joan L. and William Pagliuca. 1985. Cross-linguistic comparison and the development of grammatical meaning. Historical semantics and historical word formation, ed. by Jacek Fisiak, 59-83. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Chang, Yu-hsiu. 1998. The study of personal pronouns in Mandarin political discourse. MA thesis. NTNU.
Chafe, W.C.. 1976. Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. Subject and topic, ed. by CN Li, 25-56. New York: Academic Press.
---------------. 1987. Cognitive constraints on information flow. Coherence and grounding in discourse, ed. by R. Tomlin. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
---------------. 1994. Discourse, consciousness, and time: the flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Clancy, P.. 1980. Referential choice in English and Japanese. The pear stories, ed. by WL Chafe. Advances in Discourse Processes Vol. 3. Ablex Norwood.
Claudi, Ulrike and Bernd Heine. 1986. On the metaphorical base of grammar. Studies in Language, 10: 297-335.
Chafe, Wallace and Johanna Nichols (eds.). 1986. Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Clark, Herbert H. and Richard J. Gerrig. 1990. Quotations as demonstrations. Language, 66: 764-805.
Chen, Ping. 1984. A discourse analysis of third person zero anaphora in Chinese. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Chu, Chauncey C.. 1998. Discourse grammar of Mandarin Chinese. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
Chui, Kawai. 2001. Topic chain and grounding in Chinese discourse. Taipei: Crane Publishing.
Craig, Colette. 1991. Ways to go in Rama: a case study in polygrammaticalization. Approaches to grammaticalization, eds. by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine, 455-92. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Durie, M.. 1988. Preferred argument structure in an active language. Lingua 74: 1-25.
Fox, B.. 1986. Local patterns and general principles in cognitive processes: anaphora in written and conversational English. Text, 6 (1): 25-51.
---------. 1987a. Discourse structure and anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
---------. 1987b. Morpho-syntactic markedness and discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 11: 359-75.
Givon, T.. 1991. Serial verbs and the mental reality of ‘event’: grammatical vs. cognitive packaging. Approaches to grammaticalization, eds. by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine, 81-127. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Grice, H. P.. 1975. Logic and conversation. Speech acts (Syntax and semantics, vol. 3), eds. by P. Cole and J. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press.
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi, and Friederike Hunnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: a conceptual framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hockett, Charles. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: MacMillan.
Hopper, Paul J.. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. Approaches to grammaticalization, eds. by Bernd Heine and Elizabeth Traugott, 17-36. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hopper, Paul J. and Elizabeth Traugott. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hopper, Paul J. and Sandra Thompson. 1984. The discourse basis for lexical categories in universal grammar. Language 60: 703-52.
----------------------------------------------. 1985. The iconicity of the universal categories ‘noun’ and ‘verbs’. Iconicity in syntax, ed. by J. Haiman, 151-83. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Jacob, L. Mey. 1993. Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Kitagawa, Chisato and Adrienne Lehrer. 1990. Impersonal uses of personal pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics, 14.5: 739-59.
Krenn, Monica. 1987. ‘Extended reference’ in English and German. Grammar in the construction of texts, ed. by J. Monaghan, 123-33. London: Frances Pinter.
Laberge, Suzanne and Gillan Sankoff. 1979. Anything you can do. Discourse and syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon, 419-40. New York: Academic Press.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Langacker, R. W.. 1985. Observations and speculations on subjectivity. Iconicity in syntax, ed. by John Haiman, 109-50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
---------------------. 1990. Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics 1: 5-38.
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levinson, Stephen C. 1995. Three levels of meaning. Grammar and meaning: Essays in honor of Sir John Lyons, ed. by F. R. Palmer, 90-115. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford.
Li, Charles N. 1976. Subject and topic. New York: Academic Press.
Li, Charles N., and Sandra Thompson. 1976. Subject and topic: a new typology. In Li, ed. (1976).
--------------------------------------------. 1979. Third-person pronouns and zero-anaphora in Chinese discourse. Syntax and semantics 12: discourse and syntax, ed. by T. Givon, 311-35. New York: Academic Press.
---------------------------------------------. 1981. Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Li, Cherry Ing. 1985. Participant anaphora in Mandarin Chinese. PhD dissertation. University of Florida.
-----------------. 1999. Utterance-final particles in Taiwanese: a discourse-pragmatic analysis. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co..
Li, Cherry I. and Ivy S. Liu. 1994. Lang in Taiwanese spoken discourse. Papers from the 1994 Conference on Language Teaching and Linguistics in Taiwan I: Southern Min, eds. by Feng-fu Tsao and Mei-hui Tsai, 167-202. Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Lin, Hsiu-chuan. 1993. The pragmatic uses of personal pronouns in Mandarin Chinese. MA thesis. NTNU.
Lin, Hsueh-o. 1999. Reported speech in Mandarin conversational discourse. PhD dissertation. NTNU.
Longacre, R.. 1979. The paragraph as a grammatical unit. Syntax and semantics 12: discourse and syntax, ed. by T. Givon, 115-34. New York: Academic Press.
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meillet, Antonie. 1912. L’evolution des forms grammaticales. Scientia (Rivista di Scienza) 12, No. 26, 6. Reprinted in Meillet 1958, 130-48.
--------------------. 1958. Linguistique historique et linguistique generale. Paris. Champion.
Scancarelli, J.. 1985. Referential strategies in Chamorro narratives: preferred clause structure and ergativity. Studies in Language 9 (3): 335-62.
Shi, Dingxu. 1989. Topic chain as a syntactic category in Chinese. Journal of Chinese Linguistics, 17: 223-61.
Stirling, Lesley. 2001. The multifunctionality of anaphoric expression: a typological perspective. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 21: 7-23.
Sweetser, Eve E.. 1988. Grammaticalization and semantic bleaching. Proceedings of the fourteenth annual meeting. 389-405. Berkeley: BLS.
Tao, Hongyin. 1996. Units in Mandarin conversation: prosody, discourse, and grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1982. From propositional to textual and expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. Perspectives on historical linguistics, eds. by Winfred P. Lehmann and Yakov Malkiel, 245-72. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
------------------------------. 1986. From polysemy to internal semantic reconstruction. Proceedings of the twelfth annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 539-50. Berkeley: BLS.
------------------------------. 1988. Pragmatic strengthening and grammaticalization. Proceedings of the fourteenth annual meeting, 406-16. Berkeley: BLS.
------------------------------. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language, 65: 31-55.
------------------------------. 1995. Subjectification in grammaticalization. Subjectivity and subjectivisation: linguistic perspectives, eds. by Dieter Stein and Susan Wright, 31-54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
------------------------------. 2000. Semantic change: An overview. The first glot international state-of-the-article book: the latest in linguistics, eds. by Lisa Cheng and Rint Sybesma, 385-406. Mouton de Gruyter.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Ekkehard Konig. 1991. The semantic-pragmatics of grammaticalization revisted. Approaches to grammaticalization, eds. by E. C. Traugott and B. Heine, 189-218. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Tsao, Feng-fu. 1979. A functional study of topic in Chinese: the first step toward discourse analysis. Taipei: Student Book Company.
----------------. 1990. Sentence and clause structure in Chinese: a functional perspective. Taipei: Student Book Company.
Wang, Leslie Fu-mei. 2001. Classifiers in Taiwan Min. Master’s thesis. Taipei: NTNU.
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1994. Semantics and epistemology: the meaning of ‘evidentials’ in a cross-linguistic perspective. Language Sciences,16: 81-137.