本論文以格式與認知語法理論為基礎，探討當代閩南語疾病用語格式在語意及句法上的互動，並對其繼承運用語言系統中常見格式的形式與意義的羨餘現象，提供清楚的描述與合理的解釋。根據實際採集的書面及口語語料，本文首先羅列出疾病表達式中出現的論元結構格式，說明疾病客體論元的屬性結構對受事/處所論元、謂語、及補語的搭配具一定的選擇與限制關係。
此外為了說明語言系統中存在著普遍的概括關係及羨餘，我們以存在式、隱現式、擁有式、氣象式、與疾病及物式為例，以概念隱喻延伸、次部分連結等來解釋各句構格式之間的促發與繼承連結的機制、並以各句構格式的共性及區別性的語意特徵來論證這些句構格式是一個呈放射形結構範疇的格式家族，在形式與語義上有著系統性的概括關係及羨餘，雖具備類似的基本義，但透過促發繼承、隱喻、格式與格式搭配所產生的額外語意，各句式自己也擁有其特殊語義，彼此之間具有家族相似性關係。
有關謂語與論元結構格式在其各自所指涉的事件類型的搭配關係，我們歸納及物疾病式中Ec與 Ev的關係為：Ev有表達Ec的情狀方式、先決條件、或次類型三種關係，其中又以 <Ev-Ec + 先決條件> 動詞為大宗，這是因為對於疾病事態轉變的事件，因果關係中的原因或先決條件是重要的細部語意資訊。而不及物疾病式中受事主語句的Ec與 Ev的關係主要有二：Ev表明Ec的情狀方式、Ev為識別Ec的方法，這是因為疾病客體或事態論元作為影子論元，嵌入動詞或形容詞謂語中，此外疾病客體論元也可能是在句法上顯影為名詞謂語的真實論元，因此不及物疾病式需仰賴Ev來識別Ec；
最後本文採取Vendler(1967)的時間圖式對謂語作分類，並觀察動相分類對論元體現上的解釋力。疾病事態中謂語的動相類別只有狀態、活動、及瞬成三類。對不同動相類別謂語作概念分解後，我們發現無法單從動相因素來得出疾病式中所有的論元體現關係，需進一步整合參照動詞所表達事件的其他語意因素才能獲得充分的解釋，如疾病事件中的[感知]特性對論元體現有著一定的決定性。確認了從謂語詞彙動相分類及其概念結構來解釋論元體現仍是有待進一步商確與探討的作法的同時，也更進一步強化了本文從格式語法出發，探討論元結構格式與謂語的搭配與選擇限制關係，以及格式間的促發與繼承連結關係的解釋力，的確優於單從一謂語出發來解釋論元投射的作法，由此我們證明格式對語言描述具有重大的解釋力。

No studies have ever tried to demonstrate the various types of disease-denoting constructions (henceforth DC). This thesis provides a comprehensive description and an adequate account for the various types of DC in Taiwanese Southern-Min (henceforth TSM) within a construction-based framework. A finding that emerges in this study is that qualia structures of disease-denoting theme arguments not only play a major role in determining the profiling or shadowing of locative arguments syntactically, but also constrain how composition of other constituents (predicate or complement) operate.
A central thesis of this work is that proto-disease-denoting argument structure of TSM has an intimate link with types of construction – form-meaning correspondences that exist independently of particular verbs. I explore the idea that the argument structure construction of proto-disease-denoting sentence, [NP Patient + NP Locative + V + NP/Adj. Theme], is a special subclass of constructions, which means [Xtheme exist or (dis)appear in/on patient’s (whole or part of) body]. I argue that existential, (dis-)appearance, possessive, disease-denoting, and weather argument structure constructions belong to the same category in terms of their similarities and difference in semantic and syntactic characteristics. Existential and (dis-)appearance constructions are prototypes. Possessive, DC, and weather constructions differ from the prototypes in one or more features. They are systematically related to each other in form and functions. Thus there is a relation among them which can be best captured as a kind of family resemblance. In particular, they may represent metaphorical extensions (as in possessive construction and DC) or a subpart of the prototypes (as in weather construction). That is, the existential / (dis)appearance form [NP Locative + V + NP Theme] is associated with a set of systematically related senses. Possessive, DC, and weather constructions inherit the basic form and meaning from existential or (dis-)appearance construction grounded on the principle of cost-free redundancy. It can be viewed as a case of radial structure. Generalizations over constructions and systematical redundancy within TSM are thus captured via inheritance network within construction-based framework.
As for the relations between verb semantics and DC semantics, not all types of verbs can occur in DC. Only the verbs that are compatible with the basic meanings of DC can occur in the construction. Let Ev be the event type designated by the verb, and Ec the event type designated by the construction (Goldberg 1995). In transitive DC, Ev may designate a precondition or the manner of Ec, and Ev may be a subpart of Ec. <Ev-Ec>=Precondition is the majority since precondition (or cause) denotes the most important semantic information in causally-linked disease event. In the case of intransitive DC, disease-denoting themes may well be the shadow arguments and semantically incorporate into verbal or adjectival predicates. Besides, they may be the true arguments and syntactically realized in nominal predicates. Therefore a large majority of Ev designates the manner or the means of identifying Ec in intransitive DC.
As to the predicates in DC, they are classified into three classes: state, activity, and achievement within Vendler’s (1967) time schemata. Furthermore, predicate decomposition is adopted to see if predicates in the same aspectual class share syntactically salient properties, including those relevant for determining argument realization. I conclude that it is not possible to handle argument realization only in terms of lexical aspect (Aktionsart). Predicates with similar aspectual characterizations do not share the same range of argument realization. I further show that sentience, which is construed to be one of the most important properties in disease event and lacks a natural place in the aspectual approach, is involved in argument realization of DC. In this monograph, it is shown that constructions are essential to a description of the domain of disease-denoting sentences and DC is proved to be inherited from ordinary argument structure constructions in TSM. It is, therefore, justifiable to conclude that constructions are crucial to the description of language.

(依中文姓氏筆劃及英文字母順序排列)
朱景松. 1998. 動詞重疊式的語法意義。中國語文，第五期。
朱景松. 2003. 形容詞重疊式的語法意義。語文研究，2003年第3期。
朱德熙. 1956. 現代漢語形容詞研究。語言研究。1956年第一期。
李長青. 2002. 《爾雅》所見疾病詞語淺說。海南大學學報人文社會科學版，Vol. 20 No. 3。
李臨定. 1986. 《現代漢語句型》。北京：商務印書館。
呂叔湘. 2002. <試論補語>，《呂叔湘全集第13卷》。遼寧教育出版社。
周俊勛. 2003. 《魏晉南北朝志怪小說中有關疾病的動詞》。華中科技大學學報社會科學版。
周學勝編著. 2004. 《中醫基礎理論圖表解》。第二版。北京：人民衛生出版社。
林仲. 2000. 《皮膚病的台灣民俗醫學》。台北：健康世界雜誌社。
胡明揚主編. 1996. 《詞類問題考察》。北京：北京語言文化大學出版社。
洪麗卿. 1994. 台灣閩南語進行態標誌「ti2」的語意及用法. 台灣閩南語論文集.105-120. 台北: 文鶴出版有限公司。
孫廣仁. 2002. 《中醫基礎理論》。北京：中國中醫藥出版社。
連金發. 1994. 臺灣閩南語的完結時相詞試論。臺灣閩南語論文集。台北：文鸜出版有限公司。
連金發. 2000. 構詞學問題探索。漢學研究第18卷特刊。p. 61-78。
連金發. 2004a. 《荔鏡記》動詞分類和動相、格式。第二屆漢語方言研討會。台北：中研院語言學研究所。
連金發. 2004b. 臺灣閩南語的存在句：動詞固有意義和動相、格式的互動。石鋒、沈鍾偉(編)，王士元教授七十華誕慶祝文集：樂在其中。P.144-157。天津：南開大學出版社。
黃金貴. 1995. 《古代文化詞義集類辨考》。上海教育出版社。
梁其姿. 1999. 中國麻風病概念演變的歷史。中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊，第七十本，第二分。台北：中研院歷史語言研究所。
曹逢甫、鄭縈. 1994. 談閩南語「有」的五種用法及其間的關係。中國語文研究第11期。香港中文大學。
曹逢甫. 1998. 台灣閩南語中與時貌有關的語詞“有”、“ø”、和“啊”試析。清華學報。新二十八卷第三期：299-334。
陳平. 1988. 論現代漢語時間系統的三元結構。中國語文，Vol. 6. 。
陳伯彥. 2000. 臺中榮總兒童醫學部兒童感染科。http://www3.vghtc.gov.tw:8082/ped/family/disease/diesase-online.htm
陳超然. 1995. 漢語中的存在句：以結構語法觀點為本的分析。清華大學語言學研究所碩士論文。
湯廷池. 1999. 漢語動詞組補語的句法結構與語意功能：北平話與閩南話的比較分析，《閩南語語法研究試論》。台北：台灣學生書局。
湯廷池. 1999. 閩南話否定詞的語意內涵與句法表現，《閩南語語法研究試論》。台北：台灣學生書局。
湯廷池. 2000a. 為閩南語動詞試定界說，《漢語語法論集》。台北：金字塔。
湯廷池, 湯志真. 2000b. 閩南語的動貌詞與動相詞，《漢語語法論集》。台北：金字塔。
湯廷池. 2002. 漢語複合動詞的使動與起動交替。語言暨語言學，3.3：615-644。中央研究院語言學研究所。
湯廷池、張淑敏. 2002. 閩南語形容詞的重疊：型態、意義與限制。第四屆台灣語言及其教學學術國際研討會論文集。
董秀芳. 2000. 動詞性並列式複合詞的歷時發展特點與詞化程度的等級。河北師範大學學報(社會科學版)第23卷第1期。
劉月華、潘文娛、故韡. 1996. 《實用現代漢語語法》。台北：師大書苑。
魏文真. 1995. 國語的有字句。清華大學語言學研究所碩士論文。
羅林森 (Rolinson), M.C. 醫學的論述和醫學的實踐。凱斯鮑姆(編輯).1982.《病患的人文學》，田納西大學出版。P. 69~85.。
Ackerknecht, Erwin H. 1945. Marlaria in the Upper Mississippi Valley, 1760-1900. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, Supplement No. 4. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.
CancerWEB’s On-line Medical Dictionary. 1997-2005. Dept. of Medical Oncology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. http://cancerweb.ncl.ac.uk/omd/
Carlson, G. 1977. Reference to Kinds in English, PhD. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Clark, Eve V. 1978. Locationals: existential, locative, and possessive constructions. In Greenberg, J. H. et al. (eds.), Universals of Human Language. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Croft, William. To appear. Aspectual and Causal Structure in Event Representation. To appear in a volume edited by Virginia C. M. Gathercole.
Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language. Vol. 67. No. 3.
Editors of The American Heritage Dictionaries. 2002. The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary. Houghton Mifflin Company.
Foster, George M. & Anderson, Barbara Gallatin. 1978. Medical Anthropology. New York :Wiley. (中譯本) 陳華、黃新美譯. 1992. 《醫學人類學》。台北：桂冠出版社。
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2003. Constructions: a new theoretical approach to language. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences. Vol.7 No.5.
Goldberg, Adele E. 2005. Constructions, Lexical Semantics and the Correspondence Principle: Accounting for Generalizations and Subregularities in the Realization of Arguments. The Syntax of Aspect, N. Erteschik-Shir and T. Rapoport (eds.). Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, Adele E. To appear. Pragmatics and Argument Structure. Larry Horn and Gregory Ward (eds). Handbook of Pragmatics.
Harley, George Way. 1941. Native African Medicine: With Special Reference to its Practice in the Mano Tribe of Liberia. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Huang, James C-T. 1987. Existential sentences in Chinese and (in) definiteness. From “The representation of (in) definiteness” ed. By Eric J. Reuland and Alice G.B. ter Meulan. MIT.
Jackendoff, Ray. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge, Mass.:MIT Press.
Jackendoff, Ray. 2002. Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Johnson, Mark. 1987. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kratzer, A. 1989. An Investigation into the Lumps of Thought, Linguistics and Philosophy, 12: 607-653.
Lakoff, George, and Johnson, Mark. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things – What Categories Reveal about the Mind. University of Chicago Press. 梁玉玲.楊靜寬.王稼鈞譯. 1994.《女人、火與危險事物一範疇所揭示之心智的奧祕》。台北：桂冠圖書公司。
Levin, B. and M. Rappaport Hovav. 2005. Argument Realization, Cambridge University Press.
Lien, Chinfa. 2001. The Semantic Extension of Tioh8著 in Taiwanese Soughern Min. Language and Linguistics 2.2: 173-202. Taipei: The Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Lien, Chinfa. 2005. Phase and Aspect Markers in Li Jing Ji. Essays in Chinese Historical Linguistics: Festschrift in Memory of Professor Fang-Kuei Li on His Centennial Birthday. Language and Linguistics Monograph Series Number W-2. Taipei: Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Matsumoto, Yo. 1991. Some Constraints on the Semantics Sources of Verbs: Evidence from Japanese Motion Predicates. Unpublished Manuscript, Standford University.
Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary, 1995. Merriam-Webster, Inc.
On-line Medical Dictionary, 1997-98. Academic Medical Publishing & CancerWEB
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Pustejovsky, James. 1998. The Semantics of Lexical Underspecification. Folia Linguistica.
Randy J. LaPolla. 1995. Pragmatic relations and word order in Chinese. Institute of History & Philology, Academia Sinica, In Word order in Discourse, ed. By Pamela Downing, Michael Noonam. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Saeed, John, I. 1997. Semantics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Smith, Carlota S. 1990. Event types in Mandarin. Linguistics 28: 309-336. Walter de Gruyter.
Smith, Carlota S. 1991. The Parameter of Aspect. Kluwer: Academic Publishers.
Talmy. Leonard. 1985. Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms. Langauge typology and syntactic description, vol. 3: grammatical categories and the lexicon, ed. Timothy shopen, 57-149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toombs, S.Kay. 1993. The Meaning of Illness: A Phenomenological Account of the Different Perspectives of Physician and Patient. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Tsao, Feng-fu. 2001. Semantics and Syntax of Verbal and Adjectival Reduplications in Mandarin and Taiwanese Southern Min. Sinitic Grammar: Synchronic and Diachronic perspectives, ed. By Hilary Chappell. Oxford University Press.
Van Valin, R. D., and R. J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
語料參考書目及網站
王育德著. 陳恆嘉譯. 2002. 王育德全集6 《台灣語常用語彙》。前衛出版。
李榮主編. 周長楫編纂. 2000.《閩南話詞典》。臺南：金安文教機構。
岩崎敬太郎. 大正11年《臺灣語典》。2nd.ed. 台灣總督府專賣局。
周長楫、周清海編. 2002.《新加坡閩南話詞典》。中國社會科學出版社。
吳宏逸編著. 2004. 《即學即用台語會話》。臺北：萬人出版社。
胡萬川總編輯，賴萬發等主編. 1994.《彰化縣民間文學集二》故事篇(一)。彰化縣立文化中心編印。
胡鑫麟. 1994/5.《分類台語小辭典》。自立晚報社。
黃元興. 1992. 《國語台語2500較難句對照》。台閩語系研究室。
陳主顯. 1997.《台灣俗諺語典》卷一：人生哲理。前衛出版。
陳修主編. 1991.《台灣話大詞典》。台北：遠流出版。
木通口靖（Yasushi Higuchi）. 1992. 《台灣語會語》。東京：東方書店。
董忠司總編纂. 2001. 《臺灣閩南語辭典》。臺北：五南。
劉克明編.大正五年. 《國語對譯臺語大成》。臺北：新高堂書店發行。
楊青矗. 1992.《台華雙語辭典》。臺北：敦理出版社。
Douglas & Barclay著. 1990.《廈英大辭典》。台北：南天。
台語文Condordance網站 http://203.64.42.21/TG/Concordance/form.asp
教育部國語辭典 1998. 網站 http://140.111.34.46/dict/
中研院語言所「搜詞尋字」語庫查詢系統 http://words.sinica.edu.tw/