타동성 논의에 포함될 필요가 있는 문법적 연어의 특징에 대하여
A Study on the Characteristics of Korean Grammatical Collocations Needed to be Included in the Discussion on Transitivity
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper aims to clarify that the discussion of the transitivity in Korean, in order to show the overall figure of its transitivity, should deal with some grammatical collocations such as ‘-에 대해, -을 가지고, -을 보고’ etc. To obtain this goal we re-examine the prototypical features of transitivity studied by many scholars both at home and abroad, and show the unit-ness of grammatical collocations and an indirect evidence that some non-canonical markers are used in some languages, especially for the sentences in low degree transitivity. When we regard the transitivity as a collection of prototypical features, we could get the potential result that the sentences, using accusative marker ‘-을/를’ for their objects, show wide distribution on the types of transitivity, on the contrary the sentences, using the grammatical collocations instead of the accusative marker, only show quite restricted and low-degree transitivity.
Abstract
This paper aims to clarify that the discussion of the transitivity in Korean, in order to show the overall figure of its transitivity, should deal with some grammatical collocations such as ‘-에 대해, -을 가지고, -을 보고’ etc. To obtain this goal we re-examine the prototypical features of transitivity studied by many scholars both at home and abroad, and show the unit-ness of grammatical collocations and an indirect evidence that some non-canonical markers are used in some languages, especially for the sentences in low degree transitivity. When we regard the transitivity as a collection of prototypical features, we could get the potential result that the sentences, using accusative marker ‘-을/를’ for their objects, show wide distribution on the types of transitivity, on the contrary the sentences, using the grammatical collocations instead of the accusative marker, only show quite restricted and low-degree transitivity.
참고문헌 (26)
- 류구상, "한국어의 목적어" (2001), 월인
- 서경숙, "현대국어 조사 상당어에 대한 연구", 석사, 국어학, pp.2004
- 연재훈, "타동성의 정의를 위한 원형이론적 접근", 언어, 22(1) (1997)
- 이윤표, "한국어의 목적어" (2001), 월인
- 이은경, "우리말 연구 서른아홉 마당" (2005), 태학사
- 이은경, "명사를 중심어로 하는 문법적 연어 구성", 한국어 의미학, 17, pp.177~205 (2005), 한국어의미학회
- 이홍식, "국어 문장의 주성분 연구" (2000), 월인
- 임근석, "문법적 연어의 개념 정립을 위하여", 형태론, 7(2), pp.277~301 (2005), 형태론
- 임근석, "한국어 연어 연구", 박사, 국어학, pp.2006
- 임근석, "문법적 연어의 사전적 처리에 대하여", 한국언어문화, (34), pp.351~380 (2007), 한국언어문화학회
- 임근석, "통계적 방법을 이용한 문법적 연어 후보 추출", 한국어학, 45, pp.305~333 (2009), 한국어학회
- 임근석, "문법적 연어와 한국어 교육 －조사적 연어를 중심으로－", 한국어교육, 20(3), pp.161~184 (2009), 국제한국어교육학회
- 임근석, "한국어 연어 연구" (2010), 월인
- 임근석, "한국어 연어 연구의 전개와 쟁점에 대하여", 國語學, (61), pp.359~387 (2011), 국어학회
- 임홍빈, "{을", 를} 조사의 의미와 통사, 1980, pp.2, ~
- 의 문법적 연어를 중심으로, "한국어학", 2007, 391~418, pp.한국어학회
- Aikenvald, A. Y., "Non-cacononical Marking of Subject and Objects" (2001), John Benjamins
- Blake, B. J., "Case" (2004), Cambridge University Press
- Givón, T., "Syntax, Volume I" (2001), John Benjamins
- Hagège, C., "Adpositon" (2010), Oxford University Press
- Haspelmath, M., "Non-canononical marking of core arguments in European languages", ~ (2001)
- Hopper, P. J., "Transitivity in grammar and discourse", Language, 56 (1980)
- Lazard, G., "Transitivity revisited as an example of a more strict approach in typological research", Folia Linguistica, 36, pp.3~4 (2003)
- Mel’čuk, I., "Introduction à la Lexicologie Explicative et Combinatoire", Editions Duculot, ~ (1995)
- Næss, Å., "Prototypical Transitivity" (2007), John Benjamins
- Tsunoda, T., "Remarks on transitivity", Journal of Linguistics, 21(2) (1985)