佛教文獻是回鶻語存世文獻的主體部分，這些文本基本保持以一種回鶻語的書面語言寫成。學者們基於突厥語族語言的歷史發展，普遍認同這種書面語言在隨後的幾個世紀中基本保持不變。如果將回鶻語譯本語言與原典語言進行平行比較可以發現，回鶻語譯漢文佛教文獻語言的形態句法系統呈現明顯的歷史發展變化。基於此，本文以若干回鶻語譯漢文佛教文獻為例，考察回鶻語狀語從句歷史發展變化。通過與漢文原典的平行比較可以發現：回鶻語譯者除了使用回鶻語固有的核心句法手段功能對應漢文原典句法結構以外，狀語從句中連詞使用的比例也逐漸增多，主句句首位置常使用與原典固定對應的引導詞，還類推出多種關係名詞結構。最終，回鶻語譯漢文佛教文獻語言呈現更加顯赫的分析型句法特徵。回鶻語狀語從句的歷史發展進一步證明了佛經翻譯這一非自然語言接觸現象對語言發展的影響。
Abstract
Buddhist texts constitute the principal body of extant Old Uyghur literature, traditionally recognized as being composed in a standardized written language. Based on the diachronic change of the Turkic language family, scholars generally agree that this written language remained essentially unchanged over the following centuries. However, a comparative analysis of the Old Uyghur translations against their source texts reveals significant historical evolution within the morphosyntactic system. Focusing on several Chinese Buddhist texts translated into Old Uyghur, this paper investigates the historical development of adverbial clauses. The parallel comparison demonstrates that, while translators employed native Uyghur syntactic devices to correspond to the source structures, there was a gradual increase in the use of conjunctions within adverbial clauses. Furthermore, specific leading particles, which correspond fixedly to the original texts, frequently appear at the beginning of main clauses, and various relative nominal constructions were analogically extended. Consequently, the language of these Buddhist translations exhibits increasingly prominent analytic syntactic features. This diachronic development of adverbial clauses further proves the impact of Buddhist scripture translation—a phenomenon of unnatural language contact—on linguistic evolution.
关键词
佛教漢語 /
佛教回鶻語 /
佛經翻譯 /
語言接觸 /
狀語從句
Key words
hybrid Buddhist Chinese /
Old Uyghur /
translation of Buddhist texts /
language contact /
adverbial clauses
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
阿依達爾·米爾卡馬力. 2007.從敦煌出土回鶻文佛教文獻看漢語對回鶻文佛典語言的影響.烏魯木齊:新疆大學博士學位論文.Aydar Mirkamal. 2007. Cong Dunhuang chutu Huihuwen Fojiao wenxian kan Hanyu dui Huihuwen Fodian yuyan de yingxiang. Wulumuqi: Xinjiang Daxue boshi xuewei lunwen .
阿依達爾·米爾卡馬力. 2025.出土文獻與回鶻佛教史的重構.西域研究2.7-9.Aydar Mirkamal. 2025. Chutu wenxian yu Huihu Fojiaoshi de chonggou.Xiyu Yanjiu 2. 7-9.
陳健榮. 2018.論並列連詞語法化的條件.當代語言學20(1).40-60.Kin Wing Kevin Chan. Lun binglie lianci yufahua de tiaojian.Dangdai Yuyanxue 20(1). 40-60.
耿世民. 2008.回鶻文哈密本《彌勒會見記》研究.北京:中央民族大學出版社.Shimin Geng. 2008. Huihuwen Hamiben “Mile Huijianji” Yanjiu. Beijing: Zhongyang Minzu Daxue Chubanshe.
江藍生. 2002.時間詞“時”和“後”的語法化.中國語文4.291-301, 381.Lansheng Jiang. 2002. Shijianci “shi” he “hou” de yufahua.Zhongguo Yuwen 4. 291-301, 381.
姜南. 2011.基於梵漢對勘的《法華經》語法研究.北京:商務印書館.Nan Jiang. 2011. Jiyu Fan-Han Duikan de “Fahuajing” Yufa Yanjiu. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
李博寒. 2021.佛經翻譯對“時”的語法化之影響.漢語史學報(第二十四輯),123-133.Bohan Li. 2021. Fojing fanyi dui “shi” de yufahua zhi yingxiang. Hanyushi Xuebao, di’ershisi ji. 123-133.
林怡岑. 2022.承接連詞“則”的用法與相關發展.清華中文學報27.5-61.Yi-Chen Lin. 2022. Chengjie lianci “ze” de yongfa yu xiangguan fazhan.Qinghua Zhongwen Xuebao 27. 5-61.
劉丹青. 2003.語序類型學與介詞理論.北京:商務印書館.Danqing Liu. 2003. Yuxu Leixingxue yu Jieci Lilun. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
王繼紅. 2014.基於梵漢對勘的《阿毗達磨俱捨論》語法研究.北京:中西書局.Jihong Wang. 2014. Jiyu Fan-Han Duikan de “Apidamo Jushelun” Yufa Yanjiu. Beijing: Zhongxi shuju .
葉爾旦. 2024.佛經翻譯語境中的語言接觸——以佛經漢語介詞“依”的回鶻語對譯為例.西域歷史語言研究集刊(第二十二輯),164-179.Erdan Ye. 2024. Fojing fanyi yujing zhong de yuyan jiechu: Yi Fojing Hanyu jieci “yi” de Huihuyu duiyi weili. Xiyu Lishi Yuyan Yanjiu Jikan, di’ershier ji, 164-179.
張麗麗. 2012.從回指到承接——試論“就”與“即”承接功能的來源.臺大中文學報38.309-358.Li-Li Chang. 2012. Cong huizhi dao chengjie: Shilun “jiu” yu “ji” chengjie gongneng de laiyuan.Taida Zhongwen Xuebao 38. 309-358.
張麗麗. 2015.“便”的語法化考察.臺大文史哲學報83.151-202.Li-Li Chang. 2015. “Bian” de yufahua kaocha.Taida Wenshizhe Xuebao 83. 151-202.
朱慶之. 1992.佛典與中古漢語詞彙研究.台北:文津出版社.Qingzhi Zhu. 1992. Fodian yu Zhonggu Hanyu Cihui Yanjiu. Taibei: Wenjin chubanshe.
朱慶之. 2009.代前言:佛教混合漢語初論.見佛教漢語研究,1-32.北京:商務印書館.Qingzhi Zhu. 2009. Daiqianyan: Fojiao hunhe Hanyu chulun. In Fojiao Hanyu Yanjiu, 1-32. Beijing: Shangwu Yinshuguan.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.& R.M.W. Dixon (eds.). 2005. Serial verb constructions: A Cross-linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edgerton, Franklin.1953. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit grammar and dictionary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Eraslan, Kemal.2012. Eski Uygur Türkçesi grameri. Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu.
Erdal, Marcel.2004. A grammar of Old Turkic. Leiden: Brill.
Foley, William A.& Robert D. Van Valin, Jr. 1984. Functional syntax and universal grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gabain, A. von.1974. Alttürkische Grammatik, 3. Aufl. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Jumabay, Uldanay.2023. Formal and functional approaches to subordination in Kazakh.Orientalia Suecana 72. 76-99.
Karahan, Akartürk.2014. Eski Uygurcada Bağlaçlar. Ankara: Grafiker Yayınları.
Kasai, Yukiyo.2008. Die uigurischen buddhistischen Kolophone. Turnhout: Brepols.
Kortmann, Bernd.1997. Adverbial subordination: A typology and history of adverbial subordinators based on European languages. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
Oda, Juten.2015. A Study of the Buddhist sūtra called Säkiz yükmäk yaruq or Säkiz törlügin yarumïš yaltrïmïš in Old Turkic. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers.
Ótott-Kovács, Eszter.2015. The syntax of non-finite clauses in Kazakh. Szeged: University of Szeged dissertation.
Rachmati, Gabdul Rašid.1936. Türkische Turfan-Texte VII. Mit sinologischen Anmerkungen von Wolfram Eberhard(APAW 1936). Berlin: Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Shogaito, Masahiro.1991. Kodai Uiguru Bun Abidatsuma Kusharon Jitsugi Sho no Kenkyu Ⅰ. Kyoto: Shokado.庄垣內正弘.1991.古代ウイグル文阿毘達磨倶舎論実義疏の研究Ⅰ.京都:松香堂書店.
Shogaito, Masahiro.1993a. Kodai Uiguru Bun Abidatsuma Kusharon Jitsugi Sho no Kenkyu Ⅱ. Kyoto: Shokado.庄垣內正弘.1993a.古代ウイグル文阿毘達磨倶舎論実義疏の研究Ⅱ.京都:松香堂書店.
Shogaito, Masahiro.1993b. Kodai Uiguru Bun Abidatsuma Kusharon Jitsugi Sho no Kenkyu Ⅲ. Kyoto: Shokado.庄垣內正弘.1993b.古代ウイグル文阿毘達磨倶舎論実義疏の研究Ⅲ.京都:松香堂書店.
Shogaito, Masahiro.2008. Uiguru Bun Abidaruma Ronsho no Bunken-gaku no Kenkyu. Kyoto: Shokado.庄垣內正弘.2008.ウイグル文アビダルマ論書の文獻學的研究.京都:松香堂.
Shopen, Timothy (ed.). 2007. Language typology and syntactic description, vol. 2, Complex constructions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Valin, Robert D., Jr.2021. Cosubordination. In Challenges at the syntax-semantics-pragmatics interface: A role and reference grammar perspective, 241-254. Cambridge: Cambridge scholar publishing.
Yakup, Abdurishid.2010. Prajñāpāramitā literature in Old Uyghur. Turnhout: Brepols.
Zieme, Peter.1976. Sïngqu Säli Tutung - Übersetzer buddhistischer Schriften ins Uigurische. In Walther Heissig, John R. Krueger, Felix J. Oinas & Edmond Schütz (eds.), Tractata Altaica: Denis Sinor, sexagenario optime de rebus altaicis merito dedicata, 767-775. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Zieme, Peter.1989. Die Vorrede zum alttürkischen Goldglanz-Sūtra von 1022.Journal of Turkish Studies (Türklük Bilgisi Araştırmaları) 13. 237-243.
Zieme, Peter.1992. Religion und Gesellschaft im uigurischen Königreich von Qočo: Kolophone und Stifter des alttürkischen buddhistischen Schrifttums aus Zentralasien. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
PDF(985 KB)
