A Comparative Study Of Chinese And Japanese Classifiers

A common feature of Chinese and Japanese language is the copious use of Classifiers, which in Japanese is named Auxiliary Numerals. The Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are closely related, while the latter were widely and deeply influenced by the former, the majority of which are borrowed from the former. There are generalities and individualities between them; they are related but different. Generally speaking, Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are more morphologically and functionally in common; but their differences are greater than commonness semantically and in specific use. This paper is a brief comparative study and analysis of Chinese and Japanese Classifiers in their naming, status, category, morphology and their relationship. Furthermore, the author did particular contrastive study and survey to Chinese and Japanese Classifiers in their authentic use, semantically. The author also made rudimentary discussion about Chinese and Japanese Classifiers, especially Chinese monosyllable Classifiers, and their relationship and characteristic feature.This paper is in four Chapters.Chapter 1 Introduction In which the author mainly introduces the aim and significance of his study, does the bibliographic review and the content, scope and method of his study. The author did appropriate comparative analysis of Chinese and Japanese Classifiers in their naming, etymology, category, meaning and use, and tentatively discusses the complicated relationship between Chinese and Japanese Classifiers. Thus, the author hopes, some basis or reference can be supplied in the teaching of classifiers, especially teaching to Japanese students.Chapter 2 where The author overviews the naming, category, morphology of and relationship between Chinese and Japanese Classifiers. There are differences in the naming, category, and status of Chinese and Japanese Classifiers, but Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are closely related historically, many being homogenies. They resemble closely in morphology, as a whole. Therefore, they are also comparable.Chapter 3 In which the author mainly compares the meaning and use of Chinese and Japanese Classifiers. Some of the Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are similar in their meaning and use; some are partly similar; others, however, are different in their meaning and use. In the last, the Chinese classifiers may or may not have their homogenies in Japanese; and vice versa. By authentic corpus, the author did particular comparative analysis to every major classifier in their meaning and use no matter whether they are similar or different.Chapter 4 Summary. The abundant use of classifiers is a common feature of Chinese and Japanese language. And Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are of some intercommunity. But their meaning and use are much different. Most comparable classifiers are much different and distinct in meaning and use. So generally speaking, Chinese and Japanese Classifiers have more difference than similarity. This is especially interesting to know for the teaching of classifiers. We can make use of the intercommunity between the two systems of classifiers, to help learners understand and master the features of classifiers as a whole, while in the meaning and use of specific classifiers, we will pay more attention to their difference, to avoid misleading and confusion.In summary, Chinese and Japanese Classifiers are different not only in grammatical terms such as naming and category, but also in their meaning and use. The difference and uniqueness, compared with their intercommunity, are more worthy of our attention, contrasting and study.