現代漢語中涵蓋許多「說」類慣用語，這些以詞為單位的形式在話語中常作為言談標記，用以表達說話者的態度與情感。過去文獻對「說」的語法化已有相當討論，但較少關注其在語言演變過程中所形成的新詞彙，而「說實在」即為其中之一。本文以「說實在」為研究對象，探討其詞彙化現象及其語義，並採用 Halliday（1985）提出的「語言三大元功能」，觀察其篇章功能與人際互動功能，同時結合 Schiffrin（1987）的會話模型進行分析。
研究結果顯示，在詞彙化方面，口語中「說實在」的「說」已歷經虛化，並與「實在」結合為一個整體，在句中以單一單位呈現，顯示其已形成言談標記。本研究亦以Biber（1999）所提出之立場語義來分析「說實在」經常表達那些立場，研究發現「說實在」在口語中可作為認知立場副詞與風格立場副詞。就篇章功能而言，「說實在」主要用於延續既有主題，對前述內容進行補充或澄清。就人際互動功能而言，當其表達認知立場時，主要功能為斷言；當表達風格立場時，則常用於表達負面情感。此外，當「說實在」為認知立場時，還可用以標示說話者預設雙方具有共同認知。
本研究以口語語料庫為基礎，分析「說實在」的詞彙化現象、語義立場，以及其篇章與人際互動功能，並與其他「說」類近義言談標記進行比較，以補充漢語言談標記研究之相關討論。

Modern Mandarin Chinese contains many idiomatic expressions involving shuo (“say”). These word-based forms often function as discourse markers in conversation to express speakers’ attitudes and emotions. Previous studies have extensively discussed the grammaticalization of shuo (“say”), but have paid relatively less attention to the new lexical items formed during the process of language change. Among these forms is shuoshizai (“說實在”). This study takes shuoshizai as its research object, exploring its lexicalization and semantics. It adopts the three metafunctions of language proposed by Halliday (1985) to examine its textual and interpersonal functions, while also incorporating the discourse model proposed by Schiffrin (1987) for analysis.
The results show that, in terms of lexicalization, the verb shuo (“say”) in spoken discourse has undergone semantic bleaching and has combined with shizai (“honestly/in fact”) to form an integrated unit that appears as a single element within sentences, indicating that it has developed into a discourse marker. Drawing on the stance semantics proposed by Biber (1999), this study further analyzes the types of stance frequently expressed by shuoshizai. The findings indicate that in spoken Mandarin, shuoshizai can function as both an epistemic stance adverb and a style stance adverb. In terms of textual function, shuoshizai is primarily used to continue an existing topic and to provide further elaboration or clarification of preceding discourse. Regarding interpersonal function, when expressing epistemic stance, its primary role is assertion; when expressing style stance, it is often used to convey negative emotions. In addition, when functioning as an epistemic stance marker, shuoshizai may also indicate that the speaker presupposes shared knowledge between interlocutors.
Based on a spoken corpus, this study analyzes the lexicalization, semantic stance, textual functions, and interpersonal functions of shuoshizai, and compares it with other semantically related discourse markers involving shuo (“say”), thereby contributing to research on Chinese discourse markers.

王力(1985)。中國現代語法。商務印書館。
史金生(2003)。語氣副詞的範圍，類别和共現順序，中國語文，(1)，17-31。
江庭宜(2009)。漢語「說」類引導碼之分類和語用功能分析。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文。
江伊惠(2011)。「如果說」的語義分類、語用功能與語法化。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文。
呂叔湘(1980)。現代漢語八百詞。北京：商務印書館。
肖奚強(2007)。略論「的確」、「實在」句法語用差異。語言研究，2，74-78。
吳曜任(2010)。國語「真是」與「實在是」的強調功能及詞匯化研究。國立臺灣師範大學碩士論文
李勁榮(2007)。「實在」句的語義格局與句法制約。世界漢語教學，2，40-53。
李梅(2001)。論現代漢語語氣副詞。內江師範學院學報，16(5)。20-27。
李櫻(2003)。 語義與語用的互動。臺灣語文研究，169-183。
林慶隆、陳沛璇、白明弘、吳鑑城、李詩敏、吳欣儒、丁彥平、許愷容、盧昱勳、王冠孺(2021)。跨域趨勢──台灣華語文語料庫與能力基準整合應用系統。台北市：國家教育研究院。
紀萍(2022)。語用標記「老實說」的負面評價功能浮現。阜陽師範大學學報(社會科學版)，205(1)。
高麗君(2010)。中文「其實」與「事實上」在口語與書面語的語用功能探究及其教學啟示。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文。
孫利萍(2017)。現代漢語言說類話語標記研究〔電子書〕。華僑大學哲學社會科學文庫。
張誼生(2000)。現代漢語副詞的性質、範圍與分類。語言研究，2，51-63。
陳熹 (2008)。 試論語氣副詞「實在」的句法、語義、語用。大理學院學報 (綜合版)， 7(1)，24-26。
陳穎(2024)。所言真實和所評真實——以「說真的」和「真的」的差別為例。漢語學報，86(2)，15-25。
黃慧如(2010)。論「說」在台灣國語中的整合模式語法化。國立清華大學博士論文。
黃旭妙(2010)。華語「就是」和「只是」的語用功能探究。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文。
董秀芳(2003)。「X說」的詞彙化。語言科學，(2)，46-57。
董秀芳(2007)。詞彙化與話語標記的形成。世界漢語教學，(1)，50-61。
蔡維天(2024)。不是說 「說」而已── 談語法化中的句法驅動機制。清華學報， 54(3)，421-446。
羅喻方(2019)。語料庫詞彙研究：語氣副詞「真的」、「實在」、「的確」、「確實」使用辨析語教學建議。國立台灣大學碩士論文。
蘇慧娜(2022)。漢語語氣複詞「簡直」之語義、語用、篇章研究。國立政治大學碩士論文。
Brinton, L. J., & Traugott, E. C. (2005). Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge University Press, pp. 89-110.
Biber, D. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. New York: Longman.
Blakemore, D. (1992). Understanding utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.
Blakemore, D. (2002). Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers (Vol. 99). Cambridge university press.
Bybee, J. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Blackwell Publishing company
Du Bois, J. W. (2008). The stance triangle. In Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139-182). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Elly, Ifantidou-Trouki (1993). Sentential adverbs and relevance. Lingua, 90(1-2), 69-90.
Fraser, B. (1988). Types of English discourse markers. Acta Linguistica Hungarica, 38(1/4), 19-33.
Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of pragmatics, 14(3), 383-398.
Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6, 167-190.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers?. Journal of pragmatics, 31(7), 931-952.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Speech acts (pp. 41-58). Brill.
Hsueh-O Lin (2004). Grammaticalization of the Reported Speech Frames Wo shuo and Ni shuo in Mandarin Conversation. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 30(2), 157-182.
Halliday, M.A.K (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M.(Ed.) (2014). Halliday's introduction to functional grammar. (4th ed.) Routledge.
Leech, G. N.（1983）Principles of pragmatics. Routledge.
Li & Thompson (1989). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Univ of California Press.
Lily I-Wen Su (2004). Subjectification and the Use of the Complementizer SHUO. Concentric: Studies in Linguistics, 30(1), 19-40.
Nuyts, J. (2001). Epistemic modality, language, and conceptualization: A cognitive-pragmatic perspective. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University.
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers (No. 5). Cambridge University Press.
Schreiber, P. A. (1972). Style disjuncts and the performative analysis. Linguistic inquiry, 3(3), 321-347.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition (Vol. 142). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure (Vol. 54). Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, E. C., & Heine, B. (Eds.). (1991). Approaches to Grammaticalization: Volume II. Types of grammatical markers (Vol. 19, No. 2). John Benjamins Publishing, pp.189-218
Traugott, E. C. (1995). Subjectification in grammaticalization. In S. Wright & D. Stein (eds). Subjectivity and Subjectification, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.31-54
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2002). Regularity in semantic change (Vol. 97). Cambridge University Press.
Traugott, E. C. (2010). Revisiting subjectification and intersubjectification. Subjectification, intersubjectification and grammaticalization, 29, 71.
Wang, Y. F., Katz, A., & Chen, C. H. (2003). Thinking as saying: shuo (‘say’) in Taiwan Mandarin conversation and BBS talk. Language Sciences, 25(5), 457-488.