‘아무’의 형태·통사·의미에 대하여
On the the morphology, syntax and semantics ‘amu’
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper has two goals. The first one is to explain why 'amu'(아무) cannot be realized in usage form in itself, but should they have the form 'amudo'(아무도), 'amuna'(아무나), and also to show that 'amureohada'(아무러하다) can be realized in the same way as 'amu' based on the semantic feature of 'amu'. And the second one is to elucidate the morphological structures, lexicalization, and the grammatical properties(including negative polarity) of 'amu'-based words by way of the semantic features of 'amu'. 'Amu' cannot be referential unlike other indeterminate pronouns because it has semantic feature [-fixed]. In middle Korean it didn't have the feature, but the referentiality has changed in contemporary Korean. Because of that it needs particle -'do(도)', or '-na (나)' to be realized in usage forms. 'Amureohada' also needs the special connective endings '-geodeun'(-거든), '-deunji'(-든지), semantically corresponding to '-do', '-na', to be realized. I discussed that all the forms and semantic features of 'amu'-based words can be explained by the contemporary semantic feature of 'amu' except for the fossilized pronouns.
Abstract
This paper has two goals. The first one is to explain why 'amu'(아무) cannot be realized in usage form in itself, but should they have the form 'amudo'(아무도), 'amuna'(아무나), and also to show that 'amureohada'(아무러하다) can be realized in the same way as 'amu' based on the semantic feature of 'amu'. And the second one is to elucidate the morphological structures, lexicalization, and the grammatical properties(including negative polarity) of 'amu'-based words by way of the semantic features of 'amu'. 'Amu' cannot be referential unlike other indeterminate pronouns because it has semantic feature [-fixed]. In middle Korean it didn't have the feature, but the referentiality has changed in contemporary Korean. Because of that it needs particle -'do(도)', or '-na (나)' to be realized in usage forms. 'Amureohada' also needs the special connective endings '-geodeun'(-거든), '-deunji'(-든지), semantically corresponding to '-do', '-na', to be realized. I discussed that all the forms and semantic features of 'amu'-based words can be explained by the contemporary semantic feature of 'amu' except for the fossilized pronouns.
참고문헌 (38)
- 고석주, "조사 ‘를’의 의미와 실현 －‘선택지정’의 의미를 중심으로－", 한국어학, 41, pp.207~228 (2008), 한국어학회
- 구종남, "국어 부정극어의 유형", 국어문학, 38, pp.5~26 (2003)
- 구종남, "'아무'의 지시적 성격과 출현 형태 및 의미적 해석", 한국언어문학, (79), pp.5~32 (2011), 한국언어문학회
- 국지연, "부정 극성에 대한 인지화용론적 접근", 영어학, 5(3), pp.501~525 (2005), 한국영어학회
- 권경원, "부정극어 Any에 대한 연구", 현대영어영문학, 53(4), pp.1~25 (2009), 한국현대영어영문학회
- 김미형, "부정칭 대명사와 미지칭 대명사", 한국학 논집, 24, pp.237~253 (1994)
- 김용범, "시간 지시에서 한정성과 특정성", 인문사회과학 논문집, 33, pp.33~49 (2004)
- 김충효, "국어의 의문사와 부정사 연구" (2000), 박이정
- 노명희, "국어의 탈문법화 현상과 단어화", 國語學, (67), pp.107~144 (2013), 국어학회
- 시정곤, "국어의 부정극어에 대한 연구", 국어국문학, 119, pp.49~78 (1997)
- 오규환, "단어 형성 과정으로서의 어휘화", 國語學, (68), pp.323~366 (2013), 국어학회
- 유창돈, "이조어사전" (1979), 연세대학교 출판부
- 윤영은, "'아무'와 'ANY'", 언어, 25(3), pp.455~476 (2000)
- 이기문, "국어사개설" (1962), 민중서관
- 이금희, "국어 부정칭(不定稱) 표현 ‘아무’ 계의 통사적 제약과 의미 변화", 한민족어문학(구 영남어문학), (65), pp.57~86 (2013), 한민족어문학회
- 이동규, "‘아무+(N)(이)나’와 ‘N+든지’의 효과적인 제시 방안 연구", 이중언어학, (35), pp.227~250 (2007), 이중언어학회
- 이재영, "부정극어와 부정어", 언어, 29(1), pp.107~120 (2004), 한국언어학회
- 이현우, "영어와 한국어의 부정극어" (2004), 경진문화사
- 이환묵, "국어 극어와 화용상의 가정", 어학연구, 3(2), pp.115~137 (1977)
- 임성출, "English Negative Polarity Item 'any' and Korean Counterparts 'amwuto' and 'amwuna‘", 언어과학연구, 15, pp.289~307 (1998)
- 임유종, "부정소 호응 부사에 의한 연어와 사전 기술", 한국언어문화, (27), pp.235~256 (2005), 한국언어문화학회
- 장향실, "외국인 학습자를 위한 ‘아무+명사+-(이)나’와 ‘의문대명사+-(이)든지’의 의미 연구", 우리어문연구, (31), pp.69~90 (2008), 우리어문학회
- 최기용, "한국어의 부정극어 ‘아무’에 대하여", 생성문법연구, 8(2), pp.313~341 (1998)
- Bauer, L., "English Word-Formation" (1983), Cambridge Press
- Bhat, D. N. S., "Pronouns" (2004), Oxford University Press
- Brinton, L J., "Lexicalization and Language change" (2005), Cambridge University Press
- Borkin, A., "Polarity Items in Questions", CLS, 7, pp.53~62 (1971)
- Carlson, G.N., "Distribution of Free-choice Any", CLS, 17, pp.8~23 (1981)
- Dayal, V., "Any as Inherently Modal", Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, pp.443~476 (1998)
- Giannakidou, A., "The Meaning of Free Choice", Linguistics and Philosophy, 24, pp.659~735 (2001)
- Givón, Talmy, "Syntax vol.1" (1984), John Benjamin Publishing Company
- Haspelmath, "Indefinite Pronouns" (1997), Clarendon Press
- Ioup, G., "Specificity and the Interpretation of Quantifiers", Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, pp.233~245 (1977)
- Krifka. M., "The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items", Linguistic Analysis, 2, pp.209~257 (1995)
- Ladsaw, W., "The handbook of contemporary semantic theory", pp.321~341 (1996)
- Linebarger, M. C., "The Grammar of Negative Polarity", Ph D, pp.1980
- Linebarger, M. C., "Negative Polarity and Grammatical Representation", Linguistics and Philosophy, 10(3), pp.325~387 (1987)
- Progovac, L., "Negaative and Positive Polarity" (1994), Cambridge university Press