本論文探討漢語情態詞「不可能」在社群平台 Threads 上一種新興的話語用法。在傳統用法中，「不可能」表達邏輯上的不可能，或認識情態上的低度可能性；然而在此新興用法裡，說話者卻將其用於確實已經發生的事件，形成一種表面上的真值條件翻轉：「不可能」不再否定其後的命題 P，而是預設 P 為事實，同時標記說話者對該事實的情感反應。本研究環繞三個問題展開，分別探討此用法的界定特徵、話語功能，以及歷時發展。
研究以立意抽樣自 Threads 的 110 筆語料為基礎，提出三項判準，用以區分此話語用法與其字面用法。話語用法的「不可能」絕大多數出現於句首（110 筆中有 99 筆），對其後的整個命題取轄域；其言語行為屬感嘆或表情性質，而非斷言；且預設 P 為事實，而非加以否定。「不可能」由此傳達一種帶有驚訝或讚嘆的驚奇（mirativity）立場，其效果在於對 P 的強調肯定，而非否定。
語料中亦可辨識出兩個皆見於口語互動的來源語境：一為截斷疊用的感嘆式「不可能，絕對不可能」，一為口語搭配「總不可能」；其中三國迷因作為前者病毒式擴散的放大機制。隨著此用法經由主觀化，由泛稱命題擴展至以說話者為定錨的命題，這兩個來源共同支持一種多源構式化（multiple-source constructionalization）的發展解釋。若對照三種歷時框架：此變化與古典語法化並不相符，因為它呈現的是轄域擴大、語用力道增強，而非轄域縮減與語意虛化；語用化能掌握其中一部分，卻未觸及其非組合性與多源的性質；而歷時構式語法（Diachronic Construction Grammar）下的構式化，則最能容納這些特點。就此而言，這個新興用法對三種框架都能有所回應。

This thesis examines an emerging discourse use of the Mandarin modal expression bukeneng (不可能, "impossible") in social media interaction on the text-based platform Threads. In its conventional use, bukeneng asserts logical impossibility or low epistemic probability. In its novel use, however, speakers apply it to events that have unquestionably occurred, producing an apparent truth-conditional reversal: the marker no longer negates the embedded proposition P but presupposes P as factual while marking the speaker’s affective response to it. The study asks three questions about the defining properties, discourse function, and development of this use.
Drawing on a purposively sampled corpus of 110 tokens from Threads, the analysis sets out three criteria that separate the discourse use from its literal counterpart. Discourse bukeneng appears overwhelmingly in sentence-initial position (99 of 110 tokens), taking scope over the whole proposition; it performs an exclamative or expressive speech act rather than an assertion; and it presupposes P as real rather than denying it. It thus conveys a mirative stance of surprise or admiration, so that its effect is to affirm P emphatically rather than deny it.
Two source contexts, both found in spoken interaction, feed into this outcome: a truncated interjection form (不可能，絕對不可能) and the spoken collocation zǒng bukeneng, with the 三國 (Three Kingdoms) meme acting as a viral amplifier of the interjection form. As the use extends from generic to speaker-anchored propositions through subjectification, these two sources motivate a multiple-source account of its development. Read against three diachronic frameworks, the change fits classical grammaticalization poorly, since scope widens and pragmatic force grows rather than narrowing and bleaching; pragmaticalization captures part of it but not its non-compositional, multiple-source character; and constructionalization, in Diachronic Construction Grammar, handles it best. Taken this way, the new usage has something to say about all three.

Abrams, J. J. (Director). (2006). Mission: Impossible III [Video recording].
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2012). The essence of mirativity. Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 435–485. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0017
Androutsopoulos, J. K. (Ed.). (2014). Mediatization and sociolinguistic change. De Gruyter.
Bird, B. (Director). (2011). Mission: Impossible—Ghost Protocol [Video recording].
Boye, K. (2023). Grammaticalization as Conventionalization of Discursively Secondary Status: Deconstructing the Lexical–Grammatical Continuum. Transactions of the Philological Society, 121(2), 270–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-968X.12265
Chao, Y. R. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. University of California Press.
Dancygier, B., & Vandelanotte, L. (2025). The Language of Memes: Patterns of Meaning Across Image and Text. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108950855
De Palma, B. (Director). (1996). Mission: Impossible [Film [Video recording].
DeLancey, S. (2001). The mirative and evidentiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(3), 369–382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)80001-1
Diewald, G. (2006). Context types in grammaticalization as constructions. Constructions. https://doi.org/10.24338/cons-443
Fang, H. (2018). Mirativity in Mandarin: The Sentence-Final Particle Le (了). Open Linguistics, 4(1), 589–607. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2018-0029
Fang, H., & Hengeveld, K. (2022). Sentence-Final Particles in Mandarin. Studia Linguistica, 76(3), 873–913. https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12198
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone. Language, 64(3), 501–538. https://doi.org/10.2307/414531
Fischer, O. (2008). On analogy as the motivation for grammaticalization. Studies in Language, 32(2), 336–382. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.32.2.04fis
Gao, X. X. (Director). (2010). 三國 [Three Kingdoms] [TV series] [Video recording]. Shenyang Sijixing Film & TV Production.
Givón, T. (1994). Irrealis and the Subjunctive. Studies in Language, 18(2), 265–337. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18.2.02giv
Hansen, M.-B. M. (Ed.). (2025). A new look at grammaticalization versus pragmaticalization in the rise of pragmatic markers: A typology of linear and non-linear forms of evolution. In Cyclic Change in Grammar and Discourse (p. 0). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/9780198940661.003.0011
Hengeveld, K., & Olbertz, H. (2012). Didn’t you know? Mirativity does exist! Linguistic Typology, 16(3), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity-2012-0018
Hsieh, C. (2005, July 1). Modal Verbs and Modal Adverbs in Chinese: An Investigation into the Semantic Source. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Modal-Verbs-and-Modal-Adverbs-in-Chinese%3A-An-into-Hsieh/8b5ea7ded44dc309040c476cef6e554095ee1867
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J. (1999). Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations: The What’s X Doing Y? Construction. Language, 75(1), 1–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/417472
Kiparsky, P., & Kiparsky, C. (1970). Progress in Linguistics. In A Collection of Papers (pp. 143–173). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111350219.143
Krifka, M., Pelletier, F., Carlson, G. N., Meulen, A., Chierchia, G., & Link, G. (1995). Genericity: An introduction. In The Generic Book (pp. 1–124).
Kuo, Y. H. (2024). Bidirectional grammaticalization: Chinese modal and conditional. Journal of Linguistics, 60(2), 363–398. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226723000087
Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Volume I: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. (1990). Subjectification. Cognitive Linguistics, 1(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1990.1.1.5
Lehmann, C. (1995). Thoughts on grammaticalization. Inst. für Sprachwiss., Univ. Köln.
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (1981). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. University of California Press.
Liu, B. (2015). The Mirative Use of “怎么[Zěnme]” in Mandarin Chinese and Its Semantic Consequence. In Q. Lu & H. H. Gao (Eds.), Chinese Lexical Semantics (pp. 74–82). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27194-1_8
Lou, A. (2017). Multimodal simile: The “when” meme in social media discourse. English Text Construction, 10(1), 106–131. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.10.1.06lou
Lü, S. (ed). (1999). Xiandai hanyu babai ci [Eight Hundred Words of Chinese] 现代汉语八百词 / 呂叔湘主编 (Expanded edn.). Commercial Press 商務印書館.
Mcquarrie, C. (Director). (2015). Mission: Impossible—Rogue Nation [Video recording].
Mcquarrie, C. (Director). (2018). Mission: Impossible—Fallout [Video recording].
Mcquarrie, C. (Director). (2023). Mission: Impossible—Dead Reckoning Part One [Video recording].
Mcquarrie, C. (Director). (2025). Mission: Impossible—The Final Reckoning [Video recording].
Müller, K., & Axel-Tober, K. (2025). A syntactic approach to pragmaticalization. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.16342
Narrog, H. (2012). Modality, Subjectivity, and Semantic Change: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford University Press.
Norde, M. (2009). Degrammaticalization. Oxford University Press.
Norde, M. (2012). Lehmann’s parameters revisited. In B. Cornillie, H. Cuyckens, & T. Leuschner, Studies in Language Companion Series (Vol. 130, pp. 73–110). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.130.04nor
Palmer, F. R. (Ed.). (2001). 6 Realis and Irrealis. In Mood and Modality (2nd ed., pp. 145–184). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178.008
Peterson, T. (2017). Problematizing mirativity. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 15(2), 312–342. (126707219). https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.15.2.02pet
Serrano-Losada, M. (2020). Analogy-driven change: The emergence and development of mirative end up constructions in American English. English Language & Linguistics, 24(1), 97–121. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674318000266
Sweetser, E. (1990). From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904
Traugott, E. C. (1988). Pragmatic Strengthening and Grammaticalization. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 406–416. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v14i0.1784
Traugott, E. C. (1989). On the Rise of Epistemic Meanings in English: An Example of Subjectification in Semantic Change. Language, 65(1), 31–55. https://doi.org/10.2307/414841
Traugott, E. C. (2010). (Inter)subjectivity and (inter)subjectification: A reassessment. In K. Davidse, L. Vandelanotte, & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Subjectification, Intersubjectification and Grammaticalization (pp. 29–74). De Gruyter Mouton. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110226102.1.29/html?srsltid=AfmBOor-oQf_14UMwE1vVcKeipaKZwu5Tz2diK1vVtX9jQO5S62D-ApL&lang=en
Traugott, E. C. (2012). On the persistence of ambiguous linguistic contexts over time: Implications for corpus research on micro-changes. Language and Computers, 75.
Traugott, E. C. (2022). Discourse Structuring Markers in English: A historical constructionalist perspective on pragmatics. ResearchGate. https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.33
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2002). Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500
Traugott, E. C., & Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001
Tsai, W.-T. D., & Yang, C.-Y. H. (2022). On the syntax of mirativity: Evidence from Mandarin Chinese. In New Explorations in Chinese Theoretical Syntax (Vol. 272, pp. 431–444). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.272.15tsa
Van de Velde, F., De Smet, H., & Ghesquière, L. (2013). On multiple source constructions in language change. In H. De Smet, L. Ghesquière, & F. Van de Velde (Eds.), On Multiple Source Constructions in Language Change (pp. 1–17). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.79.01int
Wang. (2023, May 16). 三國曹操迷因:不可能 絕對不可能! [Video recording]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrXMH12HAjQ
Woo, Y.-S. (Director). (2000). Mission Impossible II [Video recording]. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120755/
Wu, R.-J. R. (2004). Stance in Talk: A conversation analysis of Mandarin final particles. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.117
梗圖倉庫. (n.d.). 不可能絕對不可能 GIF 梗圖產生器. 梗圖倉庫 (Memes.tw). Retrieved May 9, 2026, from https://memes.tw/gif-post?maker=6258