本文以“对比话题”和“对比焦点”这两个概念在汉语学界的术语使用现状为切入点，借此指明它们各自的准确意义，同时考察汉语有哪些手段及标记可以表达这两种概念。 “对比话题”和“对比焦点”作为信息结构研究的重要概念，汉语学界对此展开过诸多研究。但本文发现学界在术语的使用上存在“同义不同名”和“同名不同义”的现象。首先，“对比话题”的概念虽然学界对其有准确的把握，但名称上却将其称作“话题焦点”，造成了不小的混乱。而“对比焦点”其概念意义本身并未得到准确的把握，学界多用其来指作“确认焦点”，而真正意义上“对比焦点”概念并未被人提及。由此，本文提出了相对合理的信息结构体系，并试图规范相关的术语使用问题。 接着，本文从类型语言学的角度及认知的层面，首先指出对比这一范畴存在的普遍性，并将其适用于信息结构，确立了“对比话题”和“对比焦点”这两个次范畴。本文主要使用了Büring(2003)提出的“战略(strategy)”，对其意义进行了深入分析。在此过程中，我们也探讨了汉语可以通过哪些方式和标志来表达真正的“对比话题”和“对比焦点”。本文的结论是，汉语里一般通过音韵的强弱及停顿来表示“对比话题”，同时也可通过形态手段或强或弱地表达，如副词“倒(是)”和语气助词“嘛”可强烈表达，而“呢”和“的话”可较弱表达。至于对比焦点，汉语里也可通过强弱和停顿等音韵手段来实现，同时也可借助“倒(是)”，“是’”，语气助词“嘛”，“呢”，“的话”等形态手段来强烈表达。

In this paper, the author first reviews the use of the two concepts of “contrastive topic” and “contrastive focus” in the Chinese academia, so as to clarify their respective accurate meanings and to examine the means and marks of Chinese to express these two concepts. “Contrastive topic” and “contrastive focus” are important concepts in the study of information structure, and the Chinese academia have carried out many studies on them. However, the phenomena of “synonymous meaning but different names(同義不同名)” and “same name but different meanings(同名不同義)” have been found in the use of these two terms in the Chinese academia. First of all, the concept of “contrastive topic”, despite an accurate understanding of its nature within the Chinese academia, it has been called “topic focus” which is causing confusion. On the other hand, the conceptual meaning of “contrastive focus” itself has not been accurately grasped. The academia often use it to refer to “identificational focus”, and the concept of “contrastive focus” is not mentioned in the true sense. Therefore, this paper proposes a relatively reasonable information structure system and attempts to standardize the use of related terms. Then, from the perspective of linguistic typology and cognition, this paper points out the universality of contrastiveness category and applies it to the information structure. The author raises two sub-categories of “contrastive topic” and “contrastive focus”, and analyzes their meanings deeply, using the “strategy” proposed by Buring (2003) in particular. Meanwhile, the author also explores the ways which can be used to express the true “contrastive topics” and “contrastive focus” in Chinese. The conclusion of this paper is that in Chinese, the “contrastive topic” is generally expressed by the strength and pause of the phonology, and it can also be expressed by means of morphological means. For example, the adverb “倒(是)” and the modal particle “嘛” can explicitly express it, and “呢” and “的話” can implicitly express it. As for the contrastive focus, it can also be realized by means of phonology such as strength and weakness, and also by means of morphology. For example, “倒(是)”, “是”, “嘛”, “呢”, “的話” can all express it explicitly.