本文以福建省四個方言點──漳州、詔安、尤溪、大田──為例，論證閩語小稱詞語法化過程中，語意弱化與語音形式上存在著相對應的演變歷程。藉由方言語料的比較，驗證了曹逢甫 (2004, 2006) 針對小稱詞，所提出的六階段語法化歷程，與語言事實大致相互呼應，但有部分細項區分需再次考量。如階段 C「植物細株」，與階段 D「細小物體」之間，小稱語料顯示區隔不明顯，或可合併為一類；相對地，階段 E 的細項，「暱稱」與「蔑稱」，在小稱詞尾使用上有明顯差異，應分為兩個不同階層。這四個方言點在小稱詞尾構詞變化及使用上各有不同，但仍可從中歸納出一定的準則，本文即藉由分析這些異同，找出小稱詞語法化的類型特徵與相關變項。

Tsao (2004, 2006) proposes six stages in the grammaticalization of Min diminutives. We have concluded that this development is generally correct, but in need of modification. In this paper, we argue for a correspondent development of form and meaning, considering data from four Min varieties: Zhangzhou, Zhao’an, Youxi, and Datian. Specifically, a distinction between Tsao’s stages C and D is not obvious in our data, and so should be merged into a single stage. Stage E, on the other hand, dealing with diminutives of disparagement and intimacy, should be split in two. We outline the similarities and differences of the four dialects in their diminutive morphology and usage rules and discuss the typological characteristics of diminutive grammaticalization in Min.

小稱詞; 閩方言; 語法化

Min (Chinese); diminutives; grammaticalization