‘로써’의 문법화 재론 - 통시 형식 통사론적 분석을 중심으로
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper aims to analyze the grammaticalization of particle -sse which compose the postposition -losseo with case marker -lo, in terms of the diachronic formal syntax. The previous approaches treated sse just as a grammatical morpheme or a grammatical particle. However, sse can function as likely to be predicative, being similar to verb ssu-(use). It can be proved by the predicative function of particle sse. In order to analyze the changes of the function of the particle sse, (Changguk) Yim (2008)introduces a device of the syntactic reanalysis to describe diachronic changes. This paper argues that Yim‘s (2008) syntactic reanalysis must be renewed in order to account for the continuum of the grammaticalization of particle sse. Furthermore, we can argue that the case marker -lo of postposition -losse functions as an accusative like ul/lul in the NP-losseo construction,depending on the evidence in Ancient Korean and Modern Korean dialects. In Ancient Korean and some dialects, -lo in a few contexts could function as an accusative, but it cannot, recently. According to the Hwang (2011), we can account for the accusative -lo of the transitive verb ssu- in the Modern Korean by the trace of the grammaticalization.
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the grammaticalization of particle -sse which compose the postposition -losseo with case marker -lo, in terms of the diachronic formal syntax. The previous approaches treated sse just as a grammatical morpheme or a grammatical particle. However, sse can function as likely to be predicative, being similar to verb ssu-(use). It can be proved by the predicative function of particle sse. In order to analyze the changes of the function of the particle sse, (Changguk) Yim (2008)introduces a device of the syntactic reanalysis to describe diachronic changes. This paper argues that Yim‘s (2008) syntactic reanalysis must be renewed in order to account for the continuum of the grammaticalization of particle sse. Furthermore, we can argue that the case marker -lo of postposition -losse functions as an accusative like ul/lul in the NP-losseo construction,depending on the evidence in Ancient Korean and Modern Korean dialects. In Ancient Korean and some dialects, -lo in a few contexts could function as an accusative, but it cannot, recently. According to the Hwang (2011), we can account for the accusative -lo of the transitive verb ssu- in the Modern Korean by the trace of the grammaticalization.
참고문헌 (40)
- 고영근, "보충법과 불완전계열의 문제", 어학연구, 23(3), pp.1989~ (1987)
- 고영근, "국어형태론연구" (1989), 서울대학교 출판부
- 김영욱, "불완전 계열에 대한 형태론적 연구", 국어학, 24, pp.87~109 (1994)
- 김유범, "언어 변화 이론과 국어 문법사 연구", 國語學, (43), pp.429~460 (2004), 국어학회
- 김현주, "국어 대우법 어미의 형태화 연구", 박사, 국어국문학, pp.2010
- 촘스키, "최소주의 언어이론" (2001), 한국문화사
- 성광수, "국어 조사의 연구" (1979), 형설출판사
- 시정곤, "핵이동과 ‘이", 답, 같-’의 형태 통사론, pp.생성문법연구, 1995[DOI]
- 시정곤, "국어의 선어말어미 : 선어말어미의 형태-통사론", 한국어학, 8, pp.5~38 (1998)
- 안주호, "한국어 명사의 문법화 현상 연구" (1997), 한국문화사
- 이성하, "문법화의 이해" (1998), 한국문화사
- 이지양, "국어의 융합현상" (1997), 태학사
- 임동훈, "한국어 조사의 하위 부류와 결합 유형", 國語學, (43), pp.119~154 (2004), 국어학회
- 임홍빈, "{로}와 선택의 양태화", 어학연구, 10(2), pp.143~159 (1974)
- 임창국, "한국어 이차 술어구문 : '로'의 계사적 양상", 석사, pp.1999
- 임창국, "‘-로써’의 문법화: 복합술어에서 후치사로", 생성문법연구, 18(2), pp.271~286 (2008), 한국생성문법학회
- 임창국, "통시 형식 통사론: 한국어 V>P 재분석", 현대문법연구, (55), pp.187~194 (2009), 현대문법학회
- 정경재, "불완전계열의 변화 방향 고찰", 형태론, 10(1), pp.21~41 (2008), 형태론
- 한용운, "언어 단위 변화와 조사화" (2003), 한국문화사
- 황국정, "조사 -로 의 대상성 에 관한 통시적 연구", 형태론, 7(1), pp.111~134 (2005), 형태론
- 황국정, "경주 지역어의 대상성 ‘-로’ 구문에 관한 연구 - 조사 ‘-로’와 ‘-을’이 기원적으로 이형태 관계였을 가능성에 대한 논의를 중심으로 -", 한국어학, 50, pp.261~288 (2011), 한국어학회
- 황국정, "현대국어의 필수적 ‘-로’ 논항의 실현 원인", 國語學, (63), pp.341~360 (2012), 국어학회[DOI]
- 황화상, "국어 형태 단위의 의미와 단어 형성" (2001), 月印
- Bowers, John, "The Syntax of Predication", Linguistic Inquiry, 24, pp.591~656 (1993)
- Chomsky, N., "Lectures on Government and Binding" (1981), Foris
- Chomsky, N., "Barriers" (1986), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "Bare Phrase Structure, MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 5, In Government and Binding Theory and the Minimalist Program", pp.385~439 (1995), Basil Blackwell
- Chomsky, N., "Minimalist Program" (1995), MIT Press
- Chomsky, N., "Minimalist inquiries: the framework, In Step by Step: Essays in Honor of Howard Lasnik", pp.89~155 (2000), MIT Press
- Hopper, Paul, "Grammaticalization" (1993), Cambridge University Press
- Kroch, S. Anthony, "Syntactic Change. in The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory", pp.699~729 (1989), Blackwell Publishers
- Lasnik, Howard, "Restricting the theory of transformations: A case study. In Explanation in Linguistics: The logical problem of language acquisition" (1981), Longman
- Lightfoot, David, "Principles of diachronic syntax" (1979), Cambridge University Press
- No escape from syntax: Don't try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon, "Marantz, Alec", ~, pp.In University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 4-2 (1997)
- Pintzuk, "Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanisms" (2000), Oxford University Press
- Roberts, Ian, "Verbs and Diachronic syntax" (1993), Kluwer
- Roberts, Ian, "Diachronic Syntax" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Roberts, Ian, "Syntactic Change: A Minimalist Approach to Grammaticalization" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Whitman, John, "Relabelling, In Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanisms", pp.220~238 (2000), Oxford University Press
- Zwicky, Arnold M., "Cliticization vs. inflection: the case of English n't", Language, 59(3), pp.502~513 (1983)