| 摘要: | 在地圖上遍尋不著的「六堆」，近年來與北部四縣腔客語，已逐漸劃分開來，然而同屬六堆客語區的各鄉鎮，卻又因時空環境而有語音、詞彙甚至是語法上的差異，目前大致可將內埔、美濃、萬巒、竹田、麟洛等分為一小片，高樹、長治、新埤、佳冬分為另一小片，本文旨在將分屬不同小片的高樹(以大路關為代表)與內埔，以調查訪談、描寫方法、及歷史比較法呈現共時的差異。 本文第一章緒論說明了研究動機、研究目的、研究範圍與限制、研究方法以及六堆、高樹與內埔的歷史源流；第二章文獻探討主要呈現前人研究調查六堆語言的成果與問題討論；第三章詳細陳述了大路關與內埔的語音特點；第四章分從聲母、韻母、聲調、合音等探討大路關與內埔的音韻現象；第五章為大路關與內埔的詞彙與構詞的比較；第六章從借詞觀察、方言島比較進行初步的語言接觸問題研究；第七章為結論與建議部分。 綜合比較結果，大路關在聲母方面，有v→b、f→hu的變異、顎化發展成兩套，而內埔相對趨於保守無變化；韻母方面，大路關單獨[i]出現時至今仍尚存摩擦現象、[i]音取代[ɨ]音、名詞詞尾為[i]，而內埔都無此現象，與北部四縣腔一致；聲調方面，大路關陰平調為[33]，與內埔的[24]不同，且除了陰平變調外，大路關還多了陽平變調，並因年齡層不同而有不同的變調規則，而內埔除了維持與北部一致的陰平變調，另外還發現疊字詞的變調；在詞彙方面，兩地各有受閩南語接觸影響而產生變異的詞彙或借代詞，但也有保留梅縣說法的同源詞；在語法方面，透過比較可看出兩地受閩南語滲透而產生的變化。綜而觀之，大路關的語音詞彙受閩南語影響的程度較內埔深遠，可說明語言接觸的頻繁與競爭的激烈，但部份語音的特殊性、聲調的變化規則與部分詞彙的保守現象，則又透露大路關與內埔來自於不同祖籍所致。 “Liuk-Dui”can hardly be found on the map, has been separated gradually from northen“four- counties”tone hakka dialect in recent years. Because of surrounding and history, however, pronunciation, glossary and even the syntax are different. At present approximately may in Neipu, Meinung, Wanluan, Zutien, Linluo divisions can be a small piece; Kausu, Changzi, Sinpi, Gatung can be the other. This article will focus on Kausu (to represent by Da-Lu-Kuan)and Neipu, which belong to different pieces, and investigates the interview, the description approach, and the historical comparison method. Consequently, the contemporary differences are presented altogether. The first chapter was introduction about research motives, goals, scopes, limits, research techniques. Additioally, historical source of Liuk-Dui, Kausu and Neipu are also mentioned. The second chapter dealt with discussion mainly on the prior studies about Liuk-Dui liguistic achievement and the question. Third chapter stated Da-Lu-Kuan and Neipu's linguistic traits, Fourth chapter dwelt on the consonants, the vowels, the intonations, the portmanteaus about characteristics of Da-Lu-Kuan and Neipu. Fifth chapter compared Da-Lu-Kuan and Neipu's glossaries and morphemes. Sixth chapter tackled the inntial research from the loanword observation, the dialect island comparison. Seventh chapter was conclusion and suggestion. Comprehensively, in terms of consonant, Da-Lu-Kuan has the v→b, f→hu variations and two sets of jaw developments, which tends to be conseravative in Neipu. About vowels, when [i] alone uttered still remains friction phenomenon, [i] sound substituted [ɨ] sound, the noun suffix is [i] in Da-Lu-Kuan, but Neipu doesn't have this phenomenon, which is consistent with northen“four-counties”accent. In intonation, Da-Lu-Kuan's first tone is [33], which differs from Neipu's [24]. Also, besides first tone transposition, Da-Lu-Kuan has second tone transposition and the different transposition rules. However, Neipu didn't simply maintain with north consistent first tone transposition,but also developed reiteratives. In the glossary aspect, under the influence of Amoy dialects, there have been the variation glossary or loanwords. But they also retains the Meisien homologous words. In syntax ,we may see the changes of both places from Amoy dialects. Finally, Da-Lu-Kuan's is further influenced by Amoy dialects in morpheme glossary compared with Neipu,which interprets the frequent language contacts and the severe competitions. In conclusion, Da-Lu-Kuan and Neipu are from the different origines from partial particular pronunciation, intonation change rules and partial glossary conservative phenomenon. |
