만주어 종결어미 -kini의 3인칭 주어 제약
Third Person Subject Restriction of the Manchu Verbal Ending -kini
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper examined from various angles whether there are restrictions for the third person subject in the use of the Manchu verbal ending -kini. Since Verbiest (1696), most previous studies failed to properly capture the third person subject restrictions of -kini and stated that it could appear with second or third person subject, or even with all persons. However, as a result of critical examination of the examples of first and second person subjects that appear with -kini presented by the previous studies, it was found that in most cases, the original text was incorrectly transcribed or the third person subject was misinterpreted as first or second person, and only in oaths or letters first and second person subjects were used. Meanwhile, examination on the cognates of -kini in other Tungusic languages, the reflexive of -kini in Sibe, a descendant of the Manchu language, and the Mongolian translation of the 18th century record Manju i yargiyan kooli (滿洲實錄) reveals that they all appear with third person subjects. Also, a thorough investigation of 691 cases of -kini appearing in Tongki fuka sindaha hergen i dangse (滿文老檔), which reflects the early Written Manchu, finds that the third person subject appeared in 90% of the cases, implying that it was the typical person to appear with -kini. It was also revealed that the first person subject in 67 cases was used in an oath or a similar hypothetical situation, and the second person subject had a limited distribution, appearing together with sakini 'let me know' in letters. In this paper, we tried to explain this atypical subject person of -kini using the concept of ‘deictic projection’ (Lyons 1977, Song 2015), in which the deictic origo shifts. In other words, -kini typically appears with third person subjects, but as a result of the shift of the deictic origo in 'unintentional, involuntary, and uncontrolled' situations such as retribution of oaths or in letters, it appears with atypical first and second person subjects as a ‘first person effect'.
Abstract
This paper examined from various angles whether there are restrictions for the third person subject in the use of the Manchu verbal ending -kini. Since Verbiest (1696), most previous studies failed to properly capture the third person subject restrictions of -kini and stated that it could appear with second or third person subject, or even with all persons. However, as a result of critical examination of the examples of first and second person subjects that appear with -kini presented by the previous studies, it was found that in most cases, the original text was incorrectly transcribed or the third person subject was misinterpreted as first or second person, and only in oaths or letters first and second person subjects were used. Meanwhile, examination on the cognates of -kini in other Tungusic languages, the reflexive of -kini in Sibe, a descendant of the Manchu language, and the Mongolian translation of the 18th century record Manju i yargiyan kooli (滿洲實錄) reveals that they all appear with third person subjects. Also, a thorough investigation of 691 cases of -kini appearing in Tongki fuka sindaha hergen i dangse (滿文老檔), which reflects the early Written Manchu, finds that the third person subject appeared in 90% of the cases, implying that it was the typical person to appear with -kini. It was also revealed that the first person subject in 67 cases was used in an oath or a similar hypothetical situation, and the second person subject had a limited distribution, appearing together with sakini 'let me know' in letters. In this paper, we tried to explain this atypical subject person of -kini using the concept of ‘deictic projection’ (Lyons 1977, Song 2015), in which the deictic origo shifts. In other words, -kini typically appears with third person subjects, but as a result of the shift of the deictic origo in 'unintentional, involuntary, and uncontrolled' situations such as retribution of oaths or in letters, it appears with atypical first and second person subjects as a ‘first person effect'.
참고문헌 (25)
- "「三譯總解」底本考", 알타이학보, 2, pp.87~103 (1990), 한국알타이학회
- 김주원, "만문노당 태조 1-2" (2019), 서울대학교출판문화원
- 박상철, "만주어 문어의 시제와 양상 연구 —<滿文老檔>의 용례를 중심으로—", 박사, pp.2017
- 송재목, "증거성과 인칭의 상호작용", 언어학, 73, pp.111~132 (2015), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 연규동, "만주어의 원망법", 언어학, 62, pp.3~33 (2012), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 윤석찬, "페르디난트 페르비스트의 『만주어 원리(Elementa Linguae Tartaricae)』: 예수회 선교사가 빚어낸 서양 최초의 만주어 문법서", 2023년 집담회 발표자료집, pp.13~53 (2023), 서울대학교 알타이학연구소
- 河內良弘, "滿洲語文語入門" (2002), 京都大學學術出版會
- Aikhenvald, A. Y., "Evidentiality" (2004), Oxford University Press
- (2013)[URL]
- Baek, S., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.206~233 (2024), Routledge
- (2013)[URL]
- Gorelova, L. M., "Manchu grammar" (2002), Brill
- Janhunen, J., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.35~75 (2024), Routledge
- Janhunen, J., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.139~183 (2024), Routledge
- Kazama, S., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.364~406 (2024), Routledge
- Lyons, J., "Semantics(2 vols)" (1977), Cambridge University Press
- Meagan A., "Allen and Greenough’s New Latin Grammar for Schools and Colleges" (2014), Dickinson College Commentaries
- Norman, J., "A sketch of Sibe morphology", Central Asiatic Journal, 18(3), pp.159~174 (1974)
- Orlov, A., (1873), Tipografija imperatorskoj akademii nauk
- Oskolskaya, S., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.234~259 (2024), Routledge
- Poppe, N., "Grammar of Written Mongolian" (1954), Otto Harrassowitz
- Verbiest, F., "Elementa Linguae Tartaricae", Poette
- Vovin, A., "The Tungusic Languages", pp.103~138 (2024), Routledge
- Vovin, A., "The Tungusic Languages" (2024), Routledge
- Zikmundová, V., "Spoken Sibe: morphology of the inflected parts of speech" (2013), Karolinum Press
