「動詞連用形＋方をする」構文の用法と特性―使用頻度の高い事例を中心に―
The Usage and Characteristics of the 'Verb (conjunctive form) + 方をする' Construction: Focusing on Frequently Used Examples
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
本稿では、「動詞連用形＋方をする」構文に関する実証的分析を通じて、その使用実態と構文的特性を明らかにした。特に、動詞の生起頻度が50件以上の事例に着目し、修飾部との共起関係を軸に検討を行った結果、「言い方をする」と「見方をする」が全体の過半数(54.38％)を占めており、観点や様態の提示において頻用されることが確認された。この構文は意味的に抽象度が高く、修飾部の介在によってその意味が具体化・限定される傾向がある。中でも、形容詞・形容動詞による修飾が最も多く、指示語や「〜ような」「〜という」などの表現も共起しやすいことが分かった。さらに、「言い方をする」においては、その約6割(57.18％)が談話標識として機能しており、構文の語用的側面にも注目が必要である。「動詞連用形＋方をする」構文は、日本語における名詞化傾向の一端を示すものであり、日本語教育においても応用が可能であると考えられる。今後は、生起頻度の低い構文も含めて分析対象を拡張し、より包括的な用法の把握を目指す必要がある。
Abstract
This paper presents an empirical analysis of the usage and characteristics of the construction "verb (conjunctive form) + 方をする". While previous studies have mainly examined the syntactic characteristics of this construction, little attention has been paid to its actual usage. The analysis focused on cases in which the occurrence frequency of verbs was relatively high (50 or more instances), with particular attention paid to their co-occurrence with modifiers. The results reveal that "言い方をする" and "見方をする" account for more than half (54.38%) of all instances, and are frequently used to express perspectives or manners of action. The "verb (conjunctive form) + 方をする" construction is semantically abstract in isolation, and the inclusion of a modifying element is indispensable for specifying or delimiting its meaning. Among the modifying elements, adjectives and adjectival nouns appeared most frequently, followed by demonstratives and constructions such as “～ような” and “～という” which also exhibited a tendency to co-occur. Notably, in cases where "言い方をする" is modified by an adjective or adjectival noun, approximately 60% (57.18%) function as discourse markers, which is a particularly noteworthy finding. This construction reflects the Japanese language's preference for nominal expressions, and the findings of this study are considered to be applicable to Japanese language education. Future research should include an examination of peripheral cases with low frequency that were not covered in the present analysis, in order to more precisely clarify the overall usage patterns of this construction.