보조사 ‘도’와 ‘이나’의 양태 의미와 특성
The Modality Meaning and Characteristics of the Particles ‘to’ and ‘ina’
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper argues that there is modality in the particles ‘to’ and ‘ina’, and shows the possibility of discussion within the modal category system. ‘to’ represents ‘certainty judgment’ within the semantic domain of information certainty judgment, and ‘ina’ represents ‘probability judgment’. And the meaning of this modality meaning of ‘to’ was identified in four semantic functions of [inclusion], [extreme], [negation], and [concession], and ‘ina’ was identified in three semantic functions of [negative choice], [many (high)], and [condition (qualification)]. In addition, it was confirmed that both ‘to’ and ‘ina’ in [emphasis] represent ‘sensory’ among the information acquisition methods, and ‘ina’ in [estimate] represents ‘speculation’. ‘to’ and ‘ina’ show typical characteristics of modality markers in that the possessor of the modality is the speaker in the declarative text, that truth/false cannot be discriminated, that they do not enter the scope of negation, and that they do not affect the propositional content of the sentence. However, they did not show characteristics as a typical epistemic modality, such as the fact that the change of the possessor of the listener did not occur in the interrogative sentence, and that the speaker’s ‘past’ attitude could also be expressed. This paper is significant in confirming the modality of the particles ‘to’ and ‘ina’ and showing that they are likely to be dealt with in the discussion of modality as a grammatical category.
Abstract
This paper argues that there is modality in the particles ‘to’ and ‘ina’, and shows the possibility of discussion within the modal category system. ‘to’ represents ‘certainty judgment’ within the semantic domain of information certainty judgment, and ‘ina’ represents ‘probability judgment’. And the meaning of this modality meaning of ‘to’ was identified in four semantic functions of [inclusion], [extreme], [negation], and [concession], and ‘ina’ was identified in three semantic functions of [negative choice], [many (high)], and [condition (qualification)]. In addition, it was confirmed that both ‘to’ and ‘ina’ in [emphasis] represent ‘sensory’ among the information acquisition methods, and ‘ina’ in [estimate] represents ‘speculation’. ‘to’ and ‘ina’ show typical characteristics of modality markers in that the possessor of the modality is the speaker in the declarative text, that truth/false cannot be discriminated, that they do not enter the scope of negation, and that they do not affect the propositional content of the sentence. However, they did not show characteristics as a typical epistemic modality, such as the fact that the change of the possessor of the listener did not occur in the interrogative sentence, and that the speaker’s ‘past’ attitude could also be expressed. This paper is significant in confirming the modality of the particles ‘to’ and ‘ina’ and showing that they are likely to be dealt with in the discussion of modality as a grammatical category.
참고문헌 (34)
- 고석주, "한국어 조사의 연구 : '-가'와 '-를'을 중심으로", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2001
- 고영근, "우리말 문법론" (2018), 집문당
- 구본관, "한국어문법총론" (2015), 집문당
- 김상민, "보조사 ‘까지’의 인식양태 의미와 양태적 특성", 형태론, 22(2), pp.185~213 (2020), 형태론
- 김승곤, "국어토씨연구" (1992), 서광학술자료사
- 남기심, "표준국어문법론" (2011), 탑출판사
- 남기심, "표준 국어문법론" (2019), 한국문화사
- 박재연, "한국어 양태 어미 연구" (2006), 태학사
- 서정수, "국어문법" (1994), 뿌리깊은나무
- 신창순, "국어문법연구" (1984), 박영사
- 류병률, "한국어 조사 '-이나'의 의미와 쓰임", 박사, 언어학과, pp.2013
- 유현경, "한국어 표준문법" (2018), 집문당
- 이금희, "감정양태 설정과 감정양태 표현 양상 -보조용언 구성을 중심으로", 담화와 인지, 28(1), pp.211~230 (2021), 담화·인지언어학회[DOI]
- 이남순, "특수조사의 통사기능", 진단학보, 82, pp.217~235 (1996)
- 이선웅, "김윤식, 민병수, 고영근 교수 정년퇴임 기념호 : 국어의 양태 체계확립을 위한 시론", 冠嶽語文硏究, 26, pp.317~339 (2001)
- 이은정, "학교문법 통일에서 체언의 어미로 처리한 ‘이다’에 대하여", 보성, 3 (1964), 보성중고
- 이익섭, "국어문법론강의" (1999), 학연사
- 이인모, "‘이다’의 용언 시비론", 월간국학, 4 (1954), 국학대
- 이춘숙, "우리말 도움토씨 연구", 박사, 국어국문, pp.1993
- 이희승, "초급국어문법" (1949), 박문출판사
- 임동훈, "국어 양태 체계의 정립을 위하여", 한국어 의미학, 12, pp.127~154 (2003), 한국어의미학회
- 임동훈, "한국어 조사의 하위 부류와 결합 유형", 國語學, (43), pp.119~154 (2004), 국어학회
- 임동훈, "보조사의 의미론", 國語學, (73), pp.335~373 (2015), 국어학회[DOI]
- 임홍빈, "국어문법론1" (1995), 한국방송대학교출판부
- 정해권, "한국어 문법상과 어휘상의 인지언어학적 접근", 담화와 인지, 28(3), pp.81~108 (2021), 담화·인지언어학회[DOI]
- 차광일, "조선어 토대비 문법" (1981), 료녕인민출판사
- 최련, "한국어 강조 보조사 연구", 석사, pp.2015
- 최현배, "우리말본" (1971), 정음사
- 한정한, "한국어교육을 위한 보조사 ‘이나’의 의미와 기능", 언어와 문화, 16(1), pp.377~401 (2020), 한국언어문화교육학회[DOI]
- 함병호, "한국어 양태 보조사 연구", 석사, 국어학, pp.2011
- 허웅, "20세기 우리말의 형태론" (1995), 샘문화사
- 황병순, "양태조사 연구―문법화를 통해―", 한글, (290), pp.203~230 (2010), 한글학회
- 황화상, "조사의 작용역과 조사 중첩", 國語學, 42, pp.115~140 (2003), 국어학회
- Palmer, Frank Robert, "Mood and modality" (2001), Cambridge University Press