한국어 대칭구문의 중국어 대응형식 연구
A Contrastive Analysis of the Symmetric Constructions between Korean and Chinese
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In Korean, the symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] can be replaced by [NP1와 NP2가 V] construction, [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction or [NP1가 NP2를 V] construction. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the corresponding symmetric construction relation between Korean and Chinese. For that, each pattern of the Korean symmetric construction was applied to that of Chinese and investigated how each set of corresponding construction should be interpreted. The findings are as follows: First, in Korean, the substitution of [NP1가 NP2와 V] by [NP1와 NP2가 V] altered the property of nouns: NP1 as in [NP1가 NP2와 V] displays an individual meaning whereas NP1 and NP2 as in [NP1와 NP2가 V] displays a collective meaning. In Chinese, the same effect comes from the placement of the adverb, not from the structural difference between the above two patterns. Second, when Korean symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] is substituted by [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction, the [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction corresponds to two different Chinese constructions: one is the [NP1 V NP2] construction containing a transitive verb when the Korean verbs are ‘가깝다, 비슷하다, 어울리다’ and suchlike; two is the [NP1 和 NP2 V] symmetric construction when the Korean verbs are ‘모순되다, 대립하다, 반대되다’ and suchlike. Lastly, when Korean symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] is substituted by a transitive construction [NP1가 NP2를 V], the transitive construction [NP1가 NP2를 V] also corresponds to a Chinese transitive construction [NP1 V NP2]. However, the Korean verbs appearing in [NP1가 NP2와 V] symmetric construction and [NP1가 NP2를 V] transitive construction share the same form, while Chinese verbs appearing in [NP1 和 NP2 V] symmetric construction and [NP1 V NP2] transitive construction do not absolutely share the same form such as ‘见面vs见’, ‘相遇vs邂逅/遇到’.
Abstract
In Korean, the symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] can be replaced by [NP1와 NP2가 V] construction, [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction or [NP1가 NP2를 V] construction. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the corresponding symmetric construction relation between Korean and Chinese. For that, each pattern of the Korean symmetric construction was applied to that of Chinese and investigated how each set of corresponding construction should be interpreted. The findings are as follows: First, in Korean, the substitution of [NP1가 NP2와 V] by [NP1와 NP2가 V] altered the property of nouns: NP1 as in [NP1가 NP2와 V] displays an individual meaning whereas NP1 and NP2 as in [NP1와 NP2가 V] displays a collective meaning. In Chinese, the same effect comes from the placement of the adverb, not from the structural difference between the above two patterns. Second, when Korean symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] is substituted by [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction, the [NP1가 NP2에 V] construction corresponds to two different Chinese constructions: one is the [NP1 V NP2] construction containing a transitive verb when the Korean verbs are ‘가깝다, 비슷하다, 어울리다’ and suchlike; two is the [NP1 和 NP2 V] symmetric construction when the Korean verbs are ‘모순되다, 대립하다, 반대되다’ and suchlike. Lastly, when Korean symmetric construction [NP1가 NP2와 V] is substituted by a transitive construction [NP1가 NP2를 V], the transitive construction [NP1가 NP2를 V] also corresponds to a Chinese transitive construction [NP1 V NP2]. However, the Korean verbs appearing in [NP1가 NP2와 V] symmetric construction and [NP1가 NP2를 V] transitive construction share the same form, while Chinese verbs appearing in [NP1 和 NP2 V] symmetric construction and [NP1 V NP2] transitive construction do not absolutely share the same form such as ‘见面vs见’, ‘相遇vs邂逅/遇到’.
참고문헌 (25)
- 강범모, "한국어 형태소 및 어휘 사용 빈도의 분석2" (2004), 고려대학교 민족문화연구원
- 김완진, "문접속의 ‘와’와 구접속의 ‘와’", 어학연구, 6(2) (1970)
- 김영희, "대칭관계와 접속조사 ‘와’", 한글, 154 (1974)
- 김영희, "‘와’의 양상", 국어국문학, (65-66 합병) (1974)
- 김영희, "여동 구문과 ‘와’", 국어학, 38 (2001)
- 남기심, "토씨 ‘와", 과’의 쓰임에 대하여, 1990, pp.66, ~
- 양정석, "국어동사의 의미 분석과 연결이론" (1995), 박이정
- 양정석, "국어문법의 탐구Ⅲ" (1996), 태학사
- 양정석, "대칭구문과 상호구문의 의미해석", 언어, 21(1) (1996)
- 양정석, "교호성과 '-와'", 배달말, (35), pp.369~408 (2004), 배달말학회
- 우형식, "연결이론에서의 격표지 교체 분석", 애산학보, 17 (1995)
- 우형식, "국어 타동구문 연구" (1996), 박이정
- 조경순, "‘을", 를’과 교체 가능한 ‘와, 한국어 의미학, pp.2015, 49[DOI]
- 최재희, "국어 명사구 접속의 연구", 한글, 188 (1985)
- 홍재성, "한국어 자동사적 대칭동사의 통사론적 정의 - Pour une definition syntaxique de verbes symetriques intransitifs en coreen", 인문과학, 53, pp.131~158 (1985), 인문학연구원
- 홍재성, "현대 한국어 대칭구문 분석의 한 국면", 동방학지, 50 (1986)
- Jackendoff, R., "Semantic Structures" (1990), The MIT Press
- Jackendoff, R., "Parts and boundaries", Congnition, 41 (1991)
- 刘丹青, "汉语相向动词初探", 语言研究辑刊, 1 (1986)
- 呂叔湘, "現代漢語八百詞" (1995), 商務印書館
- 陶红印, "相互动词與相互动词, 句型與动词" (1987), 语文出版社
- 王传经, "对稱类关系與语义分析", 外语研究, 1 (1994)
- 袁毓林, "准雙向动词研究", 语言研究, 1 (1989)
- 张谊生, "交互类短语與连介兼类词的分化", 中国语文, 5 (1996)
- 资中勇, "汉语对稱关系表达研究", 博士, pp.2005
