从共时特征来看,藏缅语和汉语因果复句都有无标记因果复句和有标记因果复句、说明性和推论性因果复句的区分,关联标记模式大致相同且都具有多功能性。从历时演变来看,藏缅语和汉语因果关联标记都经历了从少到多、由单音节形式向多音节形式发展的历程;都有由单一模式向多样模式发展的倾向。这些看似相同的地方其实存在着差异。藏缅语和汉语关联标记多功能性产生的动因不同:藏缅语关联标记多功能性与其连词系统不发达和小句内部关系有关,汉语关联标记的多功能性与其历史渊源有关;丰富的书面语系统为汉语复句关联标记的发展提供了丰富的土壤;多来源的构词形式丰富了汉语复句关联标记,使其表义更为细致。 From the perspective of synchronic features, both the Burmese and Burmese Chinese and the Chinese causal complex sentences have the unmarked causal complex sentences and the marked causal complex sentences. The distinction between the illustrative and the inference causal complex sentences is similar and the related labeling modes are both multi-functional. From the diachronic evolution, both the Burmese and the Burmese languages ​​and the Chinese causal association markers have experienced from less to more, from monosyllabic to polyphonic forms of development; all tend to develop from a single model to a diversity of modes. There are actually differences between these seemingly identical places. The multi-functionalities of Tibetan-Burmese and Chinese-related markers are different: the multi-functionalities of Tibetan-Burmese related markers are related to the underdevelopment of their conjunctions and the internal relations of clauses; the multi-functionality of Chinese-related markers is related to their historical origins; rich written language The system provided a rich soil for the development of Chinese compound sentence association marker. The multi-source word formation enriched the Chinese compound sentence association marker and made its meaning more detailed.