本文旨透過明清戲文、日治時期的台灣語學雜誌《語苑》以及現代閩南語的語料探討閩南語常見微量構式「一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2)」在不同時期的表現。並藉由「構式語法」和「語法化」的理論應用，討論其語法結構和語意在共時和歷時的演變。
首先，「點」原為類別詞(classifier)，在微量構式的名詞組結構中，前面的數詞僅限於「一tsit8」，不能是其他數詞，且後常接小稱詞綴(diminutive suffix) 「a2」。名詞組中的名詞可以是具象的或抽象的，但絕大部分是不能表量的不可數名詞。另外，「一點」前也可和指示詞連用成為「這點tsit8 tiam2/彼點hit8 tiam2」，而「有一點u7 tsit8 tiam2」則表存在微量的用法。否定結構常見兩種：「無bo5+一點+ NP」和「一點+NP+Focus+無bo5」，我們發現前者常見在日治時期之前，後者則多出現在現代閩南語，可見其句法位置上的演變。最後，在現代閩南語中還有一特殊結構「khah4+X+一點」，且閩南語其他同樣表達微量的詞語中，如「一絲tsit8-si4- a2」、「一屑tsit8-su4-a2」等，也有著與上述「一點」相同的語法結構，顯示閩南語微量構式在共時的語法上呈現似乎相同。
本文另外的重點在討論「一點」屬於否定極詞(Negative Polarity Item)，在賓語位置用否定詞認可，若在賓語位移至動詞前則需其他焦點認可。為了補足構式語法可能無法詳盡解釋「一點」在共時和歷時中出現不同句法位置的現象，在此，我們利用擴充映射理論(Extended Mapping Hypothesis)來做解釋。「一點」的微量構式除了常見名詞組，後漸轉用於副詞組做修飾。在「khah4+X+一點」的結構中，根據Israel (2001)說明極性詞本身就是等級模式的運符(operator)，而在閩南語中「khah4」是比較運符，後面的X必接表等級的語意成分，我們利用語用蘊含(Pragmatic entailment)是為等級邏輯(Fauconnier, 1975a-b)的概念來檢視「一點」，認為「一點」在等級模式中的語意為表達「程度或量的實際值須較預設值為小，較初始值為大」的微量增量效果。最後，透過不同時期的語料，我們企圖用語法化來解釋「一點(仔)」在歷時上的演變。
本文第一章節為引言；第二章介紹前人的文獻和理論介紹；第三章開始整理「一點(仔)」的各種結構，包含「一點(仔)」的微量構式，並簡單介紹其他閩南語表達微量意思的詞語一併對照；第四章討論微量構式中「一點(仔)」在否定結構和含「khah4」的比較結構；第五章探討「一點(仔)」的語法化；第六章為結語。

The paper aim at exploring the case of 一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2) in the minimizing construction based on earlier Southern Min playscripts Li jing ji, Go-en, a Taiwanese-learning periodicals published in the Japanese period, and modern Southern Min texts.
I mainly deal with the minimizing construction in noun phrases. The minimizer tiam2 evolves from its former existence as a classifier denoting a little drop of liquid. When it becomes a full-fledged minimal quantifier, the numeral it combines with can only be tsit8 ‘one’. There are two structures in negative, “bo5+ tsit8 tiam2+ NP” and “tsit8 tiam2+NP+Focus+ bo5”. Also, we found the former is seen in Go-en, and the latter usually seen in modern Southern Min texts that display the difference of structures from diachronic perspective. Moreover, the structure, which is commonly shown in Southern Min texts, “khah4+X+ tsit8 tiam2”, shares the same structure and semantic meaning with other minimizer like “tsit8-si4-a2” and “tsit8-su4-a2”. It denotes minimizing construction tends to behave the same from synchronic perspective.
I also suggest that the minimizer tsit8 tiam2 is a negative polarity item (NPI) and it require focus in addition to negation in both subject and fronted-object positions. This can be explained by the Extended Mapping Hypothesis. Following Israel (2001), NPI can be an operator in scalar model. Thus, we considered tsit8 tiam2 as an scalar operator and the structure of “khah4+X+ tsit8 tiam2” develops the adverbial function to modify scalar adjectives. It also implies “the amount or the degree is less than the default but more than the initial value.” Last, there is a brief discussion about the development of grammaticalization of tsit8 tiam2. In short, the development of the minimizing construction maps the grammaticalization routes of historical change and partially demonstrates language universal.

表格目錄 vii
插圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究動機、範圍和方法 1
1.2語料來源 3
1.3 論文章節架構及編排 4
第二章文獻回顧 5
2.1 前人研究 5
2.1.1趙元任(1968) 5
2.1.2 楊秀芳(1991) 7
2.1.3 Lien(2011) 8
2.1.4 Chen(2012) 9
2.1.5 Hung(2013) 13
2.1.6 Bolinger(1972) 19
2.2理論介紹 22
2.2.1構式語法(Construction Grammar) 22
2.2.2等級模式的應用 27
2.3小結 31
第三章 閩南語微量構式「一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2)」的結構 32
3.1 「點tiam2」的基本結構 32
3.1.1微量構式「一點仔+NP」 33
3.1.2「指示詞(Determiner)+點+NP」 36
3.1.3「有一點+NP」 37
3.2閩南語其他微量詞 41
3.3 淡薄、少許和一寡 46
3.4 小結 54
第四章 閩南語微量構式「一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2)」的句法和語意特徵 55
4.1 否定結構 55
4.1.1否定極詞項(NPI) 55
4.1.3 「一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2)」否定式結構的句法位置 62
4.2 「khah4 X 一點」的比較結構 67
4.2.1 「khah4」比較結構的句法位置 67
4.2.2 現代閩南語「khah4 X一點」的結構 73
4.2.3「一點」在「khah4 X一點」比較結構中的微量義 80
4.3小結 83
第五章 閩南語微量構式「一點(仔) tsit8 tiam2 (a2)」的語法化 84
5.1 語法化 85
5.2 「一點 X」中X的限制 87
5.3 「一點X」的發展路徑與機制 90
5.3.1 「一點X」的發展路徑 90
5.3.2 「一點X」的發展機制 94
5.4 小結 101
第六章 結語 102
參考文獻 105

Bobaljik, J.,1995. Morphosyntax: The syntax of verbal inflection. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
Bolinger, D., 1972. Degree Words. The Hague: Mouton.
Bošković, Ž., 2004. Be careful where you float your quantifier. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22(4): 681-742
Bybee, J., and Perkins, R. and Pagliuca , W., 1994. The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chang, J-L, 2012. Analysis of types of comparative clauses in Taiwanese Southern Min. M.A. Thesis. National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Chen, I-H, 2012. How Negative Polarity Items Are Licensed: A Case Study of Mandarin Chinese NPIs. CLS 48: 139-153
Chen, L-M, 2009. The Exceed Comparative with Yi-dianer/Yi-xie in Mandarin Chinese. M.A. Thesis. National Chiao Tung University.
Diesing, M., 1992. Indefinites. Mass.: MIT Press.
Doetjes, J. S., 1997. Quantifiers and selection: On the distribution of quantifying expressions in French, Dutch and English. Doctoral dissertation, Leiden University, HAG, The Hague.
Douglas, C.,1990. Chinese-English dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy: with the principal variations of the Chang-chew and Chin-chew dialects/ by Carstairs Douglas: with Supplement to Dictionary of the Amoy colloquial language, by Thomas Barclay. Taipei: SMC Publisher
Dowty, D. and Belinda B.,1984. The semantic of “floated” quantifiers in a transformationless grammar. In Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal linguistics 3, ed. by Mark Cobler, Susannah MacKaye, and Michael Wescoat (eds.). CA: Stanford Linguistics Association.
Fauconnier, G, 1975a. Polarity and the scale principle. CLS 11: 188-99
Fauconnier, G, 1975b. Pragmatic scales and logical structures. Linguistic Inquiry 6.3: 355-75
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., and O’Connor, M. K., 1988. Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions. The case of let alone. Language 64: 510-538
Garzonio, J., and Poletto, C., 2009. Quantifiers as negative markers in Italian dialects. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 9(1), 127-151
Giannakidou, A., 1998. Polarity Sensitivity As (Non)veridical Dependency (Vol.23): John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Giannakidou, A., 1999. Affective dependences. Linguistics and Philosophy, 22, 367-421.
Giannakidou, A., 2006. Only, emotive factives, and the dual nature of polarity dependency. Language, 82.3: 575-603.
Giannakidou, A., 2009. Positive polarity items and negative polarity items: variation, licensing, and compositionality. In semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, ed. By C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, and P. Portner, Mouton de Gruyter.
Giannakidou, A., 2011. Positive polarity items and negative polarity items: variation, licensing, and compositionality. In Semantics: An International handbook of natural language meaning, ed. By C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, and P. Portner, 1660-1712. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Giannakidou, A., and S. Yoon, 2010. No NPI licensing in comparatives. Chicago Linguistic Society. Vol. 37
Givón, T. 1971. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology. An archelogist’s field trip. CLS 7. 394-413
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and coversation. In Syntax and Semantics Volume 3: Speech Act, ed. by Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan, 41-58. New York: Academic Press.
Harris, A. C., and Campbell L., 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P, 2004, Lexicalization and grammaticalization: Opposite or orthogonal? In Bisang, Himmenlmann & Wiemer (eds.), 19-40
Hoeksema, J., 1983. Negative polarity and comparative. Natural Language and Lingustic Theory 1, 403-44
Hoeksema, J., 2010. Negative and positve polarity items: An investigation of the interplay of lexical meaning and global conditions on expression. The Expression of Negation, 4, 187.
Hopper, P. J. and Traugott Elizabeth C., 2003[1993]. Grammaticalization. 2d rev. ed. (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Horn, L.R., 1972. On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Doctoral dissertation, UCLA.
Horn, L.R., 1989. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hsieh, M.L., 2001. Form and meaning: Negation and question in Chinese. University of Southern California: doctoral dissertation.
Huang, C-T. James, Li, Y-H. Audrey, and Li, Yafei. 2009. The Syntax of Chinese. Cambridge University Press.
Hung, P.Y., 2013 The Grammaticalization of Post-verbal yidian ‘一點’ in Mandarin Chinese. M.A. Thesis. National Chiao Tung University.
Isarel, M., 1996. Polarity sensitivity as lexical semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 19: 619-666
Isarel, M., 1997. The scalar model of polarity sensitivity. In D. Forget et. al. (ed)., Negation and Polarity: Syntax and Semantics. John Benjamins. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia. 209-229.
Isarel, M., 1998. The Rhetoric of Grammar: Scalar Reasoning and Polarity Sensitivity. Ph.D. Dissertation, U.C. San Diego.
Israel, M., 2001. Minimizers, maximizers, and the rhetoric of scalar reasoning. Journal of Semantics 18.4. 297-331
Kay, P., 1990. Even. Linguistic and Philosophy 13: 59-111
Kim, J. B., & Kim, J. S., 2009. English Floating Quantifier Constructions: A Non-movement Approach. Language and Information, 13(1)
Klima, E., 1964. Negation in English. In The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language, ed. By J. Fodor and J. Katz, 246-323. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Ladusaw, W., 1979. Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
Ladusaw, W., 1980. Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations. New York: Garland.
Ladusaw, W., 1983. Logical form and conditions on grammaticality. Linguistics and Philosophy 6 373-92
Ladusaw, W., 1996. Negation and polarity items. In The handbook of contemporary semantic theory, ed. by S. Lappin, 321-341. Oxford and Malden: Blackwell Publishers.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. 2008. Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago press. Langacker, Ronald W., 1990, Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics 1:5-38
Langacker, R., 1977. Syntactic reanalysis. In Charles Li (ed.), Mechanisms of Syntactic Change. 57-139. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lien, Chinfa. 1999. Place deixis in Taiwan Southern Min. In Honor of Professor Mei Tsu-lin on Chinese Syntax and Morphology, ed. by Alain Peyraube and Chaofen Sun, 73-88. Paris: Centre de Recherches Linguistiques sure I’Asie Orientale, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales.
Linebarger, M.C., 1980. The grammar of negative polarity. Cambridg. MA: MIT dissertation.
Liu, C-S., 2007a. The chameleon in the Chinese Individual Exceed Comparative. Language and Linguistics 8.3: 767-796
Liu, C-S., 2007b. The weak comparative morpheme in Mandarin Chinese. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics 33.2: 53-89.
Liu, F-H.,2000. The scalar particle hai in Chinese. Cahiers de linguistique Asie orientale 29.1: 41-84
Lyons, J., 1967. A note on possessive, existential, and locative sentences. Foundations of Language 3. 390-96
Merchant, J., 1996. Object scrambling and quantifier float in German. In Kiyomi Kusumoto(ed.), Proceedings of North East Linguistic Society 26, 179-193, Graduate Linguistic Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Miyagawa, S., 1989. Structure and case marking in Japanese. San Diego: Calif: Academic Press
Narrog. H., 2009. Modality in Japanese: The Layered Structure of the Clause and Hierarchies of Functional Categories. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Norman, J., 1995. Jianyang fangyan foudingci tanyuan 建陽方言否定詞探源[Etymological origin of negative words in Jianyang]. Fangyan 方言[Dialect] 1995. 1:31-32
Progovac, L., 1994. Negative and positive polarity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Radford, A.,1988. Transformational grammar: a first course. Cambridge: New York. Cambridge University Press.
Rizzi, L., 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar: A Handbook of Generative Syntax. 281-337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Sackmann, R. 1996. The Problem of Adjectives’ in Mandarin Chinese. AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE SERIES 4, 257-276.
Shih Y-T., 2013. The polarity status of lower-scale intensifiers ‘you(yi)dian(r)’ and ‘yidian(r)’ in Mandarin Chinese. MA thesis. National Sun Yat-sen University.
Shlonsky, Ur., 1991. Quantifier as functional heads: A study of Quantifier Float in Hebrew. Lingua 84: 159-180
Shyu, S-I., 1995. The syntax of Focus and Topic in Mandarin Chinese. Doctoral dissertation. University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Sportiche, D.,1988. A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 425-449
Stefanowitsch, A., 2003. The English Imperatives: A Construction-Based Approach. Ms, University of Bremen.
Su, C.-C., 2011. Comparative Deletion: A Comparative Study of Chinese and Taiwanese Southern Min. Ph.D. dissertation. National Tsing Hua University.
Traugott, E. 1995. Subjectification in Grammaticalization. Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives ed by Dieter Stein and Susan Wright. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 31-54
Traugott, E. and Dasher, R.B., 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, E., 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 57: 33-65
Traugott, E., 1999. The role of pragmatics in a theory of semantic change. Pragmatics in 1998: Selected Papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference, II ed. By Jef Verschueren. Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association. 93-102
Tsai, W.-T. D., 2001a. On subject specificity and theory of syntax-semantics interface. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 10:129-168.
Tsai, W.-T. D., 2001b. On object specificity. In Papers on Predicative Constructions, ed. By Gerhard Jäger, Anatoli Strigin, Chris Wilder, Niina Zhang, 173-190. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 22. Berlin: ZAS
Van der Wouden, T., 1994. Negative Contexts. Doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen.
Zwarts, F., 1986. Categoriale Grammatica en Algebraische Semantiek. Een Studie naar negatie en polariteit in het Nederlands. PhD. Dissertation. University of Groningen.
Zwarts, F., 1993. Three Types of Polarity. Ms. Groningen, University of Groningen. [Reprinted in F. Hamm & Hinrichs (eds.), Plural Quantifi cation. (1996). Dordrecht: Kluwer]
Zwarts, F., 1995. Nonveridical contexts. Linguistic Analysis 25, 3-4: 286-312
丁聲樹 1952《現代漢語語法講話》，北京：商務印書館
王欣 2010〈現代漢語量詞的語義模糊性〉，《宜賓學院學報》10.9：77-79
石毓智 2001《肯定和否定的對稱與不對稱》，北京語言文化大學出版社
龙濤 2004〈量詞對名詞空間義的表達〉，《湖南科技大學學報》(社會科學版)7.5：85-90
朱德熙 1997《語法講義》，北京：商務印書館
吳守禮（校註）　2001a　《明嘉靖刊荔鏡記戲文校理》，台北：從宜工作室。
吳守禮（校註）　2001b　《明萬曆刊荔枝記戲文校理》，台北：從宜工作室。
吳守禮（校註）　2001c　《清順治刊荔枝記戲文校理》，台北：從宜工作室。
吳守禮（校註）　2001d　《清光緒刊荔枝記戲文校理》，台北：從宜工作室。
吳守禮1997《國臺對照活用辭典》—詞性分析、詳註廈漳泉音(上冊)，台北市：遠流出版公司
呂淑湘 1985《現代漢語指代詞》江藍生補，上海：學林出版社
李臨定 1990 〈動詞分類研究說略〉，《中國語文》第4期
李麗群 2005《不定量詞”點”和”些”的對比研究》，廣西師範大學碩士學位論文
李櫻 1999《台灣話的語尾助詞：言談語用的分析》，台北：文鶴出版有限公司
李櫻 2000 〈漢語研究中的語用面向〉，《漢學研究》第十八卷，323-356
李櫻 2003〈語義與語用的互動〉，《台灣語文研究》第一卷第一期
杜道流 2008〈量詞”點兒”和”些”的認知特徵〉，《淮北煤炭師範學院學報》(哲學社會科學版)29.1：44-46
沈家煊 2001 〈語言的”主觀性”和”主觀化”〉，《外語教學與研究》第四期：268-275
林建宏，張榮興 2013〈從心裡空間理論來分析華語的臨時量詞〉，《華語文教學研究》10.4：81-108
唐韵 2004〈《元曲選》賓白中的”些””些兒””一些(兒)”(下)〉，《西華師範大學學報》(哲社版)第四期，103-106
孫珏岷 2004《和不定量詞”些”、”點”相關的問題研究》，上海師範大學碩士學位論文
張誼生 2000〈論語漢語副詞相關的虛化機制-兼論現代漢語副詞的性質、分類和範圍〉，《中國語文》第一期3-15
曹逢甫 1979 《主題在漢語中的功能研究—邁向語段分析的第一步》，北京：北京語文出版社
曹逢甫、鄭縈 1995〈談閩南語「有」的五種用法及其間的關係〉，《中國語文研究》第十一期，155-167，香港中文大學
畢永峨 2007〈不定量詞詞義與構式的互動〉，《中國語文》第6期，507-515
連金發 2010〈台灣閩南語欲求情態和否定的動態分析: 競爭和演變〉， 《中國語言學報》68-88
連金發 2011〈閩南語微量詞構式探索〉，張榮興(編). 語言與認知：戴浩一先生七秩壽慶論文集. 435-448. 台北：文鶴出版
連金發 2013〈明清時期荔鏡/荔枝記閩南方言指示詞的演變：從指示詞到程度加強副詞或篇章標記〉，《語言資訊和語言類型》，第四屆國際漢學會議論文集， 129-150，台北：中央研究院
連金發 2014〈明末清初戲文中閩南語指示詞＋樣式類別詞/計量詞構式的演變：從指示詞到程度加強副詞〉.《語言暨語言學》，15(4)，495-512
連金發 2015〈現代閩南語「無」的多重功能：從階層結構入手〉，《語言暨語言學》16(2)，169-186
郭思妤 2011《中文計量詞「些」及其在名詞片語中句法角色之研究》，國立中正大學語言學研究所碩士論文
陳修 2000《台灣話大詞典》，台北市：遠流出版公司
陳穎 2003《蘇軾作品量詞研究》，四川師範大學文學院學術叢書，成都市：巴蜀書社
陳穎 2009〈"一量名"主语的指稱情况研究〉，《漢語語法研究的新拓展(四)》，21世紀第四屆現代漢語語法國際研討會論文集，邵敬敏、谷曉恆主編，北京市：北京大學
陳麗雪 2009〈《荔鏡記》指示詞的語法、語意特點〉，《台灣文學研究集刊》第五期，191-202
陳麗雪 2009〈十六世紀閩南語指示詞的語法化現象〉，《漢學研究》，27.4:179-195.
陸烁 2009〈“一量名”主语的指称情况研究〉，《漢語語法的新拓展(四)》，北京：北京大學出版社
賀春枝 2006〈不定量詞”些”和”點”修飾名詞時的對比研究〉，《內蒙古師範大學學報》35.5：290-293
楊秀芳 1991《臺灣閩南語語法稿》，台北：大安出版社
楊哲熙 2014《台灣閩南語句尾助詞的語意屬性、語用功能和句法分析》，國立清華大學語言所碩士論文
瑪利諾(Maryknoll ) 1973《中國閩南語英語字典》(Amoy English Dictionary)，台中：瑪莉諾語言中心
趙元任著，丁邦新譯 1968《中國話的文法》， 台北：台灣學生書局
趙靜雅，連金發 2009〈在《荔鏡記》的感嘆與疑問之間〉，《中國語言集刊》，3.2，香港，p.45-68
劉承慧 2012〈上古到中古「來」在構式中的演變〉，《語言暨語言學》13.2：247-287
劉堅，曹廣順，吳福祥 1995〈論誘發漢語詞彙語法化的若干成因〉，《中國語文》第三期161-169
劉順，劉雪芹 2010〈漢語名詞和量詞組合的認知研究〉，《南京師範大學文學院學報》第2期，182-188
滕小春 2010〈漢語名詞的性質和數量詞使用的關係〉，《華語文教學研究》7.2：25-38
蔡維天 2004〈談”有人””有個人”和”有些人”〉，《漢語學報》第2期：16-25
蔡維天 2009 〈漢語無定名詞組的分佈及其在語言類型學上的定位問題〉，《語言學論叢》， 第三十九輯：302-327，北京：商務印書館
鄭良偉 1989《國語常用虛詞及其臺語對應詞釋例》，台北: 文鶴
盧立祥 2014 《漢語與臺灣閩南語比較詞素之對比分析》，國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文
蕭宇佑 2013《台灣閩南語游離計量詞研究》，國立清華大學語言所碩士論文
賴慶雄 2007《 實用量詞詞典》，板橋市：螢火蟲出版
謝佳玲 2006〈漢語情態詞的語意界定：語料庫為本的研究〉，《中國語文研究》第1期：45-63
謝昌運 2008《台語加強詞的研究：語料庫語言學的分析》， 台東大學教育學系碩士論文
羅傑瑞 1995 《漢語概說》，張惠英譯，北京：北京語文出版社
蘇建唐 2016〈論臺閩語「微量」構式〔無啥物 X〕──等級模式和語法化〉，《清華學報》46.2:359-405