“말하다” 동사의 분사형의 한국어 번역에 대하여
On Korean Translation of Participles of SAYING verbs
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
When participles of SAYING verbs (e.g. le,gwn) are translated,scholars have frequently faced interpretative difficulty because their semantic domains are overlapped with those of main verbs in a sentence. The participles of SAYING verbs often occur with hyponyms (e.g. avpokri,nomai) or the very same saying verb(i.e. le,gw):avpokriqh,sontai auvtw/| oi` di,kaioi le,gontej or oi` de. ei=pan auvtw| le,gontej. In relation to the semantic or lexical overlap, many scholars have considered the participles of SAYING verbs as contact-induced syntactic change due to language contact because Semitic language has the same linguistic usage. So this is called Semitisms, Septuagintalisms,Semitic coloring, or Semitic interference among biblical scholars. However, It seems that the syntactic change of the participle of SAYING verb does not result from language contact. There are two reasons. The same syntactic changes are also shown in non-Christian literature in Greek: Sophocles, Herodotus, Aristophanes, Demosthenes,Plato, or Thucydides. It is hard to imagine that Herodotus or Plato was influenced by Semitic language. This indicates that the syntactic change of the participles of SAYING verbs was not due to language contact but due to internal change. Furthermore, the same syntactic change also occurs in other languages: Ancient Akkadian, Kambera,Buru, Tukang, Besi, Ewe, Nama, Twi, Kusasi, Cahuilla, Saramaccan,Sranan, West African PE, Thai, Khmer, Vai, and Lezgian. These languages are not related to Hellenistic Greek politically, periodically,culturally, or geographically. This also shows that the syntactic changes do not come from language contact but from internal change of Greek language. Cognitive linguistic scholars have reached a consensus that this syntactic change is called grammaticalization. That is, the SAYING verb has lost its lexical meaning but gained grammatical function. From the perspective of grammaticalization theory, participles of the SAYING verbs with main verbs can be translated into Korean in three ways. (1) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is not overlapped with those of main verbs. The SAYING verbs can be translated literally. (2) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is overlapped with those of main verbs. In other words, the SAYING participles are hypernyms of main verbs. The SAYING verbs should not be translated in a literal way because the SAYING verbs have lost their lexical meaning and, instead, gained grammatical feature (i.e. RECITATIVUM). (3) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is same with those of main verbs. This is called tautology. The SAYING verbs should not be translated into Korean in a literal way. This also functions as grammatical feature without lexical meaning like (2). Accordingly, the participles of SAYING verbs which are semantic or lexical overlap with the meanings of main verbs should be considered as grammaticalized words due to internal syntactic change not Semitisms or Septuagintalisms due to language contact. In these cases, the SAYING verbs should not be translated in a literal way. The SAYING verbs function as complements(i.e. that).
Abstract
When participles of SAYING verbs (e.g. le,gwn) are translated,scholars have frequently faced interpretative difficulty because their semantic domains are overlapped with those of main verbs in a sentence. The participles of SAYING verbs often occur with hyponyms (e.g. avpokri,nomai) or the very same saying verb(i.e. le,gw):avpokriqh,sontai auvtw/| oi` di,kaioi le,gontej or oi` de. ei=pan auvtw| le,gontej. In relation to the semantic or lexical overlap, many scholars have considered the participles of SAYING verbs as contact-induced syntactic change due to language contact because Semitic language has the same linguistic usage. So this is called Semitisms, Septuagintalisms,Semitic coloring, or Semitic interference among biblical scholars. However, It seems that the syntactic change of the participle of SAYING verb does not result from language contact. There are two reasons. The same syntactic changes are also shown in non-Christian literature in Greek: Sophocles, Herodotus, Aristophanes, Demosthenes,Plato, or Thucydides. It is hard to imagine that Herodotus or Plato was influenced by Semitic language. This indicates that the syntactic change of the participles of SAYING verbs was not due to language contact but due to internal change. Furthermore, the same syntactic change also occurs in other languages: Ancient Akkadian, Kambera,Buru, Tukang, Besi, Ewe, Nama, Twi, Kusasi, Cahuilla, Saramaccan,Sranan, West African PE, Thai, Khmer, Vai, and Lezgian. These languages are not related to Hellenistic Greek politically, periodically,culturally, or geographically. This also shows that the syntactic changes do not come from language contact but from internal change of Greek language. Cognitive linguistic scholars have reached a consensus that this syntactic change is called grammaticalization. That is, the SAYING verb has lost its lexical meaning but gained grammatical function. From the perspective of grammaticalization theory, participles of the SAYING verbs with main verbs can be translated into Korean in three ways. (1) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is not overlapped with those of main verbs. The SAYING verbs can be translated literally. (2) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is overlapped with those of main verbs. In other words, the SAYING participles are hypernyms of main verbs. The SAYING verbs should not be translated in a literal way because the SAYING verbs have lost their lexical meaning and, instead, gained grammatical feature (i.e. RECITATIVUM). (3) The lexical meaning of the participles of the SAYING verbs is same with those of main verbs. This is called tautology. The SAYING verbs should not be translated into Korean in a literal way. This also functions as grammatical feature without lexical meaning like (2). Accordingly, the participles of SAYING verbs which are semantic or lexical overlap with the meanings of main verbs should be considered as grammaticalized words due to internal syntactic change not Semitisms or Septuagintalisms due to language contact. In these cases, the SAYING verbs should not be translated in a literal way. The SAYING verbs function as complements(i.e. that).
참고문헌 (30)
- A. Deissmann, "Hellenistic Greek with Special Consideration of the Greek Bible. in: The Language of the New Testament: Classical Essays", pp.39~59 (1991), Sheffield Academic Press
- A.C. Harris, "Historical Syntax in Cross-Linguistic Perspective", pp.282~313 (1995), Cam-bridge University Press
- B. Heine, "World Lexicon of Grammaticalization", pp.267~268 (2002), Cambridge University Press
- C.-W. Jung, "The Original Language of the Lukan Infancy Narrative", pp.7~8 (2004), T&T Clark
- C. F. Burney, "The Aramaic Origin of the Fourth Gospel", pp.5255~ (1922), Clarendon Press
- Evidence for Syntactic Reanalysis: from Verbs to Complementizer in Kwa. in: Papers from the Parasession on Diachronic Syntax, "C.D. Lord", Chicago Linguistic Society, 187~189 (1976)
- D. Black, "New Testament Semitisms", BT, 39, pp.216~219 (1988)
- D.W. Chapman, "The Orphan Gospel: Mark's Perspective on Jesus", pp.161~ (1993), Sheffield Academic Press
- E.P. Sanders, "The Tendencies of the Synoptic Tradition", pp.250~ (1969), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
- F. Blass, "A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature", pp.420~ (1961), University of Chicago Press
- G. Dalman, "The Words of Jesus: Considered in the Light of Post-biblical Jewish Writings and the Aramaic Language I. Introduction and Fundamental Ideas", pp.17~ (1909), T&T Clark
- G. Deutscher, "Synta- ctic Change in Akkadian: the Evolution of Sentential Complementation", pp.6~75 (2000), Oxford University Press
- M. Wilcox, "The Aramaic Bible:Targums in Their Historical Context. in: The Aramaic Bible: Targums in Their Historical Context", pp.368~ (1994), Sheffield Academic Press
- M. Dibelius, "From Tradition to Gospel", pp.35~ (1934), Ivor Nicholson & Watson
- M. Dibelius, "Gospel Criticism and Christology", pp.74~75 (1935), Ivor Nicholson & Watson
- M. Dibelius, "Jesus", pp.25~ (1949), The Westminster Press
- N. Turner, "The Quality of the Greek of Luke-Acts. in: Studies in New Testament Language and Text: Essays in honour of George D. Kilpatrick on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday", pp.397~ (1976), E. J. Brill
- N. Turner, "A Grammar of New Testament Greek Vol. III Syntax", pp.155~156 (1963), T&T Clark
- P. Hopper, "Grammaticalization", pp.187~196 (2003), Cambridge University Press
- S. Lee, "The Origins of Jesus and Gospel Tradition: Interdirectionality of Transmission of Jesus and Gospel Tradition in Bilingual Contexts", Berlin & New York
- S. Thompson, "The Apocalypse and Semitic Syntax", pp.70~ (1985), Cambridge University Press
- S. Porter, "The Language of the Apocalypse in Recent Discussion", NTS, 35, pp.590~ (1989)
- 이상일, "Major Trends in the Recent Studies of Modal Transmission from Oral into Written Jesus Tradition － Evaluations and Implications", 신약연구, 8(1), pp.521~557 (2009), 한국복음주의신약학회
- J. Voelz, "The Language of the New Testament. in: Aufstieg und Niedergang der ro ¨mischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neuern Forschung 25.2", pp.894~906 (1974), Walter de Gruyter
- J. H. Moulton, "A Grammar of New Testament Greek Vol. II: Accidence and Word-Formation with an Appendix on Semitisms in the New Testament", pp.453~ (1929), T&T Clark
- J. Fitzmyer, "The Gospel According to Luke 2Vols", pp.114~115 (1981), Doubleday
- J.L. Bybee, "The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World", pp.76~ (1994), The University of Chicago Press
- N.F. Marcos, "The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Version of the Bible", pp.3~6 (2000), Brill
- W. Bousset, "Die Offenbarung Johannes", pp.243~ (1966), Vandenhoeck & Rup-recht
- Z. Frajzyngier, "The De Dicto Domain in Language. in: Approaches to Grammaticalization 2 Vols", pp.219~251 (1991), John Benjamins