중세 · 근대 국어 {하다}, {만？다}, {크다}의 유의 분석
A study on Synonymy relationships among {하다}, {만？다}, and {크다} in Middle and Modern Korean
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The synonymy relationships among {하다}, {만 다}, and {크 다} in Middle and Modern Korean were investigated in this study, and their historical changes were described from the ecological aspects. Their semantic similarities could be readily proved by investigating their common antonymy relationships with {젹다}, and in a sense their semantic similarities could be suggested from the meaning of their mutual permutations and corresponding Chinese characters as well. Their semantic similarities are directly shown in {하다}-{만 다} and {하다}-{크 다}, but indirectly in {만 다}-{크다}. The polysemiy of {하다} in Middle Korean is appeared as two sememes, “多” and “大”, but from the viewpoint of distribution denotation, the meaning of “多” was broader than that of “大”. Describing the synonymy relationships of {하다}-{만 다} and {하다}-{크다} are also available by comparing {한} with {만 } and {큰} which are their conjugation forms respectively, and by comparing their derivative adverbs {해(하)} with {만히} and {키} which are their derivative adverbs respectively too. In Middle Korean {해} had the role of universal stative adverbs whose succeeding predicates were action verbs, but {하} had the role of degree adverbs by usually modifying stative verbs. Therefore, {많이}, stative adverb of Present Korean, is transferred into the function of degree of adverbs as {하} in Middle Korean was. Adverb {해} couldn't have two meanings of "多“ and "大” completely, so {해} couldn't have two meanings relationship with the derivative adverb, {키} perfectly. Because historically adjective lexeme {하다} had two meanings of “多” and “大”, it was at a disadvantage in synonymy clash competition with {만 다} and {크다} which had only one simple meaning. As a result, “多”, sememe of {하다} has been unified with {만 다} and "大” has been unified with {크게}. And also by disappearance of “ㆍ” ({ 다}>{하다}) in a verb, { 다}(爲), its word form became a obsolescent word through a homonymy clash.
Abstract
The synonymy relationships among {하다}, {만 다}, and {크 다} in Middle and Modern Korean were investigated in this study, and their historical changes were described from the ecological aspects. Their semantic similarities could be readily proved by investigating their common antonymy relationships with {젹다}, and in a sense their semantic similarities could be suggested from the meaning of their mutual permutations and corresponding Chinese characters as well. Their semantic similarities are directly shown in {하다}-{만 다} and {하다}-{크 다}, but indirectly in {만 다}-{크다}. The polysemiy of {하다} in Middle Korean is appeared as two sememes, “多” and “大”, but from the viewpoint of distribution denotation, the meaning of “多” was broader than that of “大”. Describing the synonymy relationships of {하다}-{만 다} and {하다}-{크다} are also available by comparing {한} with {만 } and {큰} which are their conjugation forms respectively, and by comparing their derivative adverbs {해(하)} with {만히} and {키} which are their derivative adverbs respectively too. In Middle Korean {해} had the role of universal stative adverbs whose succeeding predicates were action verbs, but {하} had the role of degree adverbs by usually modifying stative verbs. Therefore, {많이}, stative adverb of Present Korean, is transferred into the function of degree of adverbs as {하} in Middle Korean was. Adverb {해} couldn't have two meanings of "多“ and "大” completely, so {해} couldn't have two meanings relationship with the derivative adverb, {키} perfectly. Because historically adjective lexeme {하다} had two meanings of “多” and “大”, it was at a disadvantage in synonymy clash competition with {만 다} and {크다} which had only one simple meaning. As a result, “多”, sememe of {하다} has been unified with {만 다} and "大” has been unified with {크게}. And also by disappearance of “ㆍ” ({ 다}>{하다}) in a verb, { 다}(爲), its word form became a obsolescent word through a homonymy clash.
참고문헌 (28)
- 김종택, "국어어휘론", pp.245~254 (1992), 탑출판사
- 김태곤, "중세국어 다의어와 어휘 변천", pp.445~ (2002), 박이정
- 남우성, "국어의미론", pp.33~38 (1985), 영신문화사
- 배도용, "우리말 신체어의 의미 확장 연구", 박사, pp.2001
- 심재기, "국어어휘론", pp.120~124 (1982), 집문당
- 유창돈, "語彙史硏究", pp.168~172 (1971), 선명문화사
- 유창돈, "李朝國語史硏究", pp.377~378 (1980), 半島出版社
- 이광호, "유의어 통시론", pp.180~183 (1995), 이회
- 임지룡, "국어의미론", pp.135~147 (1994), 탑출판사
- 진재호, "國語語彙史硏究", pp.110~113 (1987), 慶北大
- 천시권, "국어의미론", pp.143~161 (1971), 형설출판사
- 홍사만, "국어의미론 연구", pp.81~98 (1994), 형설출판사
- 홍사만, "국어 어휘의미의 사적 변천", pp.13~29 (2003), 한국문화사
- 홍사만, "국어 의미분석론", pp.51~65 (2008), 한국문화사
- 홍윤표, "근대국어연구(1)", pp.41~44 (1994), 태학사
- 池上嘉彦, "意味論", pp.286~29 (1975)
- 池上嘉諺, "意味論ㆍ文體論, -言語から見た人間の心-』, 伊紀國屋書店", pp.31~33 (1985)
- 池上嘉諺, "意味の世界』, 日本放送出判協會", pp.44~51 (1991)
- "大鹿薰久, 「類義語ㆍ反意語」, 玉村文郞 外(編) 『講座日本語と日本語敎育 6, -日本語の語彙ㆍ意味(上)-』, 明治書院, 1989. 243-256면", ~
- 國廣哲彌, "意味論の方法", pp.173~175 (1987), 大修館
- 國廣哲彌, "理想の國語辭典", pp.6~50 (1998), 大修館
- 森田良行, "意味分析の方法, -理論と實踐", ひつじ書房, 92(48), pp.35~42 (1996)
- Collinson, W.E, "Comparative synonymics: Some principles and illustration" (1939), Transaction of the Philological Society
- Gruber, J.S, "Lexical Structure in Syntax and Semantics" (1976), North-Holland Publishing Co
- Kats, J., "The Structure of a Semantic Theory", Language, (39) (1963)
- Lyons,J, "Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics" (1968), Cambridge Univ.Press
- Ullmann,S, "The Principles of Semantics" (1957), Oxford Basil Blackwell
- Ullmann,S, "Semantics:An Introduction to Science of Meaning" (1962), Oxford Basil Blackwell