本研究探討漢語近義修飾語小與微的語意和用法。作為名詞修飾語，小與微有「微小」之義，而作為程度修飾語，小與微則代表程度「輕微」。雖然已有文獻討論小與微的修飾行為，但鮮少有人以語言學角度探討其語意及用法，目前也無人比較這兩個近義修飾語。有鑑於此，本研究旨在運用量化與質化方法，全面分析漢語近義修飾語小與微的異同。我們蒐集自2020一月至2022五月期間，PTT語料庫男女板(Boy-Girl)、食物板(Food)、女孩板(WomenTalk)中的小與微語料，加以標記，並利用標記過後的語料，進行量化語料庫方法之行為特徵分析(Behavioral Profile Approach)，藉此找出得以有效區分小與微之語意特色。此外，本研究也以語言學角度，解釋小與微的語意延伸和語用功能。

研究結果顯示，作為名詞修飾語時，小與微有高度相似性，但作為程度修飾語時，小與微則有語意和用法上的差別。雖然小與微的使用會因為各看板內討論主題而有所差異，但整體來說，作為名詞修飾語時，小主要修飾「無生命(Inanimate)」及「有生命(Animate)」對象的「體積大小」、「年齡」，或以「小稱」稱之。微較常修飾「無生命」對象的「數量」或此類對象所及之「程度」。作為程度修飾語時，小與微皆有「程度輕微」之義，但小主要修飾「心智/情緒(Mind)」、「特徵/屬性(Attribute)」、「運動/動作(Motion)」類別的動詞和形容詞，微則修飾「特徵/屬性」、「改變(Change)」類別的動詞和形容詞居多。從研究結果發現，小與微的語意會隨著被修飾對象之不同物性角色(qualia role)而有所改變。此外，小與微的語意也藉由隱喻(metaphor)及類型轉換(coercion)而延伸，或於語境中被議定。當談及小與微的語用功能，小經常用來緩和由說話者內心的期待與現實對比之下產生的差異，而小與微皆用來弱化任何可能侵犯到說話者及聽者面子的行為。

This study investigates the meanings and usages of two Mandarin near-synonyms, xiǎo and wéi, which both denote ‘small’ or ‘little’ when used as prenominal modifiers and ‘sightly’ when used as degree modifiers. While previous works have provided some insights on ‘xiǎo/wéi + modifiee’ phrases, few studies thoroughly analyze the meanings and usages of xiǎo and wéi from a linguistic aspect, let alone a comparative analysis of the two near-synonyms. To bridge the gap, this study adopted a quantitative method and a qualitative method to comprehensively analyze the meanings and usages of xiǎo and wéi. We collected tokens of xiǎo and wéi phrases created between January 2020 and May 2022 in three PTT boards (i.e., Boy-Girl, Food, and WomenTalk) from PTT Corpus. Then, we analyzed the usage patterns of xiǎo and wéi from several linguistic dimensions (e.g., semantics, syntax, collocation, and pragmatics) with the help of the behavioral profile approach, and figured out the distinctive linguistic features and the preferred usages of xiǎo and wéi. Besides, we also provided theoretical explanations of the results, elucidating the mechanisms of xiǎo’s and wéi’s meaning extensions and different functions.

The results show that xiǎo and wéi have a high similarity when they are used as prenominal modifiers, while they show some distinctions when used as degree modifiers. Though the meanings of xiǎo and wéi and the types of their modifiees tend to vary because of the discussion topics in different PTT boards, from an overall perspective, PN_xiǎo (i.e., prenominal xiǎo) mostly takes ‘Animate’ and ‘Inanimate’ modifiees, depicting their ‘size’ or ‘age’ or providing a ‘diminutive’ expression of the referent denoted by the modifiee. On the contrary, PN_wéi frequently modifies ‘Inanimate’ modifiees, mostly describing the ‘quantity’ of the referent denoted by the modifiee or the ‘degree’ that the referent reaches. On the other hand, though degree modifiers xiǎo and wéi (D_xiǎo and D_wéi) both denote a ‘slight degree’ sense, D_xiǎo tends to modify ‘Mind’, ‘Attribute’, and ‘Motion’ modifiees, whereas D_wéi is inclined to take modifiees of ‘Attribute’ and ‘Change’. From the results, we find that certain faucet or qualia role of the modifiees are selected by xiǎo and wéi during the modification, which leads to the different meanings of xiǎo and wéi. In addition, the meanings of xiǎo and wéi are extended through mechanisms such as metaphor and type coercion. Sometimes, xiǎo’s and wéi’s senses are negotiated in the context as well. With regards to the functions of xiǎo and wéi, D_xiǎo is often used to moderate the contrast between the speaker’s standard/expectation and the reality, and both D_xiǎo and D_wéi are employed to reduce any potential threats that may impinge on the speaker’s or the hearer’s face.

Berez, Andrea L., and Stefan Th. Gries. 2008. In defense of corpus-based methods: A
behavioral profile analysis of polysemous get in English. Proceedings of the 24th Northwest Linguistics Conference. University of Washington Working Papers in Linguistics 27, ed. by Steven Moran, Darren S. Tanner and Michael Scanlon, 157-166. Seattle, WA: Department of Linguistics.
Biq, Yung-O. 2004. Construction, reanalysis, and stance: ‘V yi ge N’ and variations in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 36.9:1655-1672.
Bybee, Joan. 1998. The emergent lexicon. Chicago Linguistic Society 34:421-435.
Chang, Chun. 2004. Constructional Coercions in Semantic Representation: The Evaluative 'Degree Adverb + X' Construction in Mandarin. MA thesis, National Chiao Tung University, Hsinchu.
Cheng, Pa. 2008. Qiantan “xiao + xingrongci” de xinyongfa. Modern Chinese 9:48-49.
Chinese Knowledge and Information Processing Laboratory (CKIP Lab). 1998. Introduction to Academia Sinica Balanced Corpus (revision). Technical Report no.95-02/98-04. http://rocling.iis.sinica.edu.tw/CKIP/tr/9804_2013.pdf
Chou, Lingchen, and Shukai Hsieh. 2013. Qualia Modification in Mandarin Neologism: A Case Study on Prefix “Wéi 微”. Chinese Lexical Semantics 14th Workshop, ed. by Pengyuan Liu & Qi Su, 297-305.
Chui, Kawai. 2000. Morphologization of the degree adverb HEN. Language and
Linguistics1.1:45-49.
Cruse, D. Alan. 1986. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, D. Alan. 2010. Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Desagulier, Guillaume. 2017. Corpus Linguistics and Statistics with R: Introduction to Quantitative Methods in Linguistics. Springer.
Divjak, Dagmar and Stefan Th. Gries. 2006. Ways of trying in Russian: Clustering behavioral profiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2.1:23-60.
Divjak, Dagmar S., and Stefan Th. Gries. 2008. Clusters in the mind? Converging
evidence from near-synonymy in Russian. The Mental Lexicon 3.2:188–213.
Fellbaum, Christiane. 1990. English Verbs as a Semantic Net. International journal of
Lexicography 3.4:278-301.
Gries, Stefan Th. 2006a. Corpus-based methods and cognitive semantics: the many meanings of to run. Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics: Corpus-Based Approaches to Syntax and Lexis, ed. by Stefan Th. Gries and Anatol Stefanowitsch, 57-99. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gries, Stefan Th., and Dagmar S. Divjak. 2009. Behavioral profiles. A corpus-based approach to cognitive semantic analysis. New directions in Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by Vyvyan Evans and Stephanie Pourcel, 57-75. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company.
Gries, Stefan Th. 2010. Behavioral profiles: A fine-grained and quantitative approach in corpus-based lexical semantics. The Mental Lexicon 5.3:323-346.
Gries, Stefan Th., and Naoki Otani. 2010. Behavioral profiles: A corpus-based perspective on synonymy and antonymy. ICAME Journal 34:121-150.
Guo, Qian. 2019. “Xiao X” goushi de renzhi fenxi. Journal of Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics (Social Science Edition) 38.1:94-101.
Han, Zhaoju, and Qiushi Peng. 2007. Xiandai hanyu zhong “xiao + xingrongci” cizu yanjiu. Chinese Businessman 22:141-142.
Hopper, Paul J. 1987. Emergent Grammar. Berkeley Linguistic Society 13:139-157.
Huang, Chu-ren, and Shukai Hsieh. 2010. Infrastructure for Cross-lingual Knowledge Representation - Towards Multilingualism in Linguistic Studies. Taiwan NSC-granted Research Project (NSC 96-2411-H-003-061-MY3)
Huang, Shuanfan. 1998. Emergent lexical semantics. Selected Papers from the Second International Symposium on Languages in Taiwan, ed. by S. Huang, 129-150.
Hunston, Susan. 2004. Counting the uncountable: Problems of identifying evaluation in a text and in a corpus. Corpora and Discourse 9:157-188.
Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81.2:345-381.
Lakoff, George. 1993. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. Metaphor and Thought, ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202-251. Cambridge University Press.
I.akoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. Behavioural profiles, distance metrics and cluster analysis. How to do Linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis, 301-321. Amsterdam, Netherlands & Philadelphia, USA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Li, Jing. 2012. “Xiao + xingrongci” yongfa chutan. Chinese Knowledge 4:113-115.
Li, Yao. 2018. Study on the Format of “You Dian Xiao X”. MA thesis, Liaoning University, Shenyang.
Liesenfeld, Andreas, Meichun Liu, and Chu-Ren Huang. 2020. Profiling the Chinese
causative construction with rang (讓), shi (使) and ling (令) using frame semantic features. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2020-0027
Liu, Dilin. 2010. Is it a chief, main, major, primary, or principal concern?: A corpus-based behavioral profile study of the near-synonyms. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics15.1:56–87.
Liu, Dilin, and Maggie Espino. 2012. Actually, genuinely, really, and truly: A corpus-based behavioral profile study of the near-synonymous adverbs. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 17.2:198–228.
Liu, Shaojia. 2014. “Xiao X (X)” goushi duojiaodu kaocha. MA thesis, Central China Normal University, Wuhan.
Liu, Xu. 2015. “Wei X” de renzhi goushi yanjiu. Youth Literator 3:108-109.
Liu, Tsun-Jui. 2014. PTT Corpus: Construction and Applications. MA thesis, National Taiwan University, Taipei.
Lu, Shu-xiang, and Sheng-shu Ding (ed.) 2016. Xiandai Hanyu Cidian [A Dictionary of Current Chinese]. Beijing: The Commercial Press.
Lyons, John. 1995. Linguistic semantics: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics and Grammar II. Semantics, vol.2, 423-452. London:
Cambridge University Press.
Miller, George Armitage. 1993. Nouns in WordNet: A Lexical Inheritance System (Revised). International Journal of Lexicography 3.4:245-264.
Murphy, M. Lynne. 2010. Lexical Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ortega-Andrés, Marina, and Agustín Vicente. 2019. Polysemy and co-predication. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 4.1:1-23.
Partington, Alan. 2004. Utterly content in each other's company: Semantic prosody and semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9.1:131-156.
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Qi, Feng. 2011. Danyinjie xingrongci yu mingci zuhe de yuyi xuanze guanxi fenxi--- jiyu dingliangtongji de xingrongci “xiao” de gean yanjiu. TCSOL Studies. 43.3:70-77.
R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.
Ravid, Dorit. 2006. Semantic development in textual contexts during the school years: Noun Scale analyses. Journal of Child Language 33.4:791-821.
Sheskin, David J. 2011. Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures. New York, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Taiwan AI Labs. 2021. Automated Atypical Coincidental Behavior Analysis on Taiwan Social
Media. https://ailabs.tw/human-interaction/exploring-atypical-online-coincidental-behavior-on-ptt/
Tao, Hongyin. 2003. Toward an emergent view of lexical semantics. Language and Linguistics 4.4:837-856.
Taylor, John R. 2003. Near synonyms as co-extensive categories: ‘high’ and ‘tall’ revisited. Language Sciences 25.3:263-284.
Tian, Xinglu. 2016. A DMC Study on the Chinese Neologism “Wei X” Construction. MA thesis, Sichuan International Studies University, Chongqing.
Tsai, Mei-Chih, Chu-Ren Huang, and Keh-Jiann Chen. 1996. Yuliaoku weibende yuyi xun xi chouqu yu bianxi yi jinyici yanjiu weili [Synonym Discrimination Based on Corpus] (In Chinese). In Proceedings of Rocling IX Computational Linguistics Conference IX, ed. by Chung-Hsien Wu and Keh-Yih Su, 281–293. Tainan, Taiwan: The Association for Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing (ACLCLP).
Turney, Peter, Yair Neuman, Dan Assaf, and Yohai Cohen. 2011. Literal and Metaphorical Sense Identification through Concrete and Abstract Context. Proceedings of the 2011 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, ed. by Regina Barzilay, and Mark Johnson, 680-690. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Vicente, Agustín. 2021. Approaches to co-predication: Inherent polysemy and metaphysical relations. Journal of Pragmatics 182:348-357.
Wang, Yanhui. 2019. Qian tan “wei + danyinjie xingrongci”. Shanxi Youth 15:111.
Xi, Yanxia. 2013. “Wei” zuci shiyong xianzhuang tanxi. Chinese Market 17:98-99.
Xiao, Richard and Tony McEnery. 2006. Collocation, Semantic Prosody, and Near
Synonymy: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Applied Linguistics 27.1:103-129.
Yang, Yanqin, and Shanzhi Yu. 2012. “Wei” zai “weishidai” de yuyi yanbian jizhi yanjiu. Modern Chinese 4:91-93.
Yu, Jinyu. 2014. “Xiao” + xingrongci zhong “xiao” de xuhua chutan. Youth Literator 12:151.
Zhang, Jia. 2011. Cong “wei” qianxi “wei” de leicizhuihua xianxiang. Literatures 11:67-68.
Zhang, Shuo. 2018. Xiandai hanyu xinxing “xiao X” goushi yanjiu. MA thesis, Yangzhou University, Jiangsu Province.
Zhang, Ya-Jun. 2002. Fuci Yu Xianding Miaozhuang Gongneng [Adverbs and Descriptive Functions]. Hefei, Anhui: Education Publishing House.