量级模型视角下汉语连词“哪怕”的韩国语表达类型及其语义特点
Korean Expression Types and Semantic Features of the Chinese Conjunction 'Nǎpà' from the Perspective of Scalar Model
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
汉语连词“哪怕”是量级特征明显且多义特点显著的表达，本文主要借助相关量级模型从汉韩对应的角度对“哪怕”及其韩国语表达类型及语义特点进行了分析，初步可得出如下小结：第一，汉语连词“哪怕”对应的韩国语表达类型较多样，但语义类型较分明，主要体现在让步类表达和条件类表达两大类，在让步类型表达中主要区分了典型低限度让步类型“-(이)라도”、“-아/어/여도”等，同一性让步“-도”、限制性让步“-까지”、无条件让步“아무리……해도”，以及条件类型“-(으)면”等。第二，汉韩语相关表达在横向上呈现出不同的量级命题认知特点，纵向上，汉语“哪怕”的(交互)主观性较韩国语表达更为突出。第三，汉韩语表达呈现出横向方面的语义特点可以从汉语“哪怕”历时层面的词汇化过程进行初步解释，而纵向方面的语义特点我们从“哪怕”自身带有的反问语义与(交互)主观性之间的较强关联性以及话语交际过程中交际双方的语境顺应性进行了初步阐释。
Abstract
The Chinese conjunction 'Nǎpà' is an expression with obvious magnitude and polysemy characteristics. This paper mainly takes advantage of the scalar model to analyze 'Nǎpà' and its Korean expression types and semantic characteristics from the perspective of Chinese-Korean correspondence. The following conclusions are drawn: First, the Korean expression types corresponding to the Chinese conjunction 'Nǎpà' are diverse, but the semantic types are relatively clear, which are mainly reflected in the two categories of concession expressions and conditional expressions. Typical minimum concession types '-(i)rado', '-a/o/yodo', etc., identity concession '-do', restrictive concession '-kkaji', unconditional concession 'amuri…haedo', and conditions type '-(eu)myon' etc. Second, related expressions in Chinese and Korean show different cognitive characteristics of scalar propositions in the horizontal direction, and in the vertical direction, the (interactive) subjectivity of 'Nǎpà' in Chinese is more prominent than that in Korean expressions. Thirdly, the horizontal semantic features of Chinese and Korean expressions can be preliminarily explained from the lexicalization process at the diachronic level of Chinese and the similar semantics expressed by different grammatical repositories at the synchronic level, while the vertical semantic features we make a preliminary explanation from the strong correlation between the rhetorical semantics of 'Nǎpà' itself and (interactive) subjectivity and the context adaptation of both parties in the process of discourse communication.
참고문헌 (34)
- 박승윤, "양보와 조건", 담화와 인지, 14(1), pp.63~84 (2007), 담화·인지언어학회[DOI]
- 박재연, "연결어미와 양태 : 이유, 조건, 양보의 연결어미를 중심으로", 한국어 의미학, 30, pp.119~141 (2009), 한국어의미학회
- 박재연, "한국어 연결어미 의미 기술의 메타언어 연구 -‘양보, 설명, 발견’의 연결어미를 중심으로-", 國語學, (62), pp.167~197 (2011), 국어학회[DOI]
- 신지연, "대립과 양보 접속어미의 범주화", 어문학, (84), pp.75~98 (2004), 한국어문학회
- 션스린, "온라인 한중사전의 기술 개선 방안 연구: 연결어미 ‘-면’의 의미를 중심으로", 언어과학연구, (100), pp.109~136 (2022), 언어과학회
- 심지영, "‘-기라도 하-’ 구문의 의미와 기능 - 일본어 및 중국어 대응 표현과의 비교를 겸하여 -", 비교문화연구, 60, pp.193~221 (2020), 비교문화연구소[DOI]
- 전영철, "Aspectual Adverbs and Donkey Anaphora", 언어학, (23), pp.165~187 (1998), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 특정성, 총칭성, 복수성, "한국어 명사구의 의미론-한정성", pp.2013, 전영철
- 전영철, "한국어의 의미와 의미 이론" (2023), 박이정
- 황현동, "‘-어도’절의 사실성에 대하여 - 연결어미 ‘-어도’의 은유 구조를 중심으로", 한국어문교육, (37), pp.257~287 (2021), 한국어문교육연구소[DOI]
- 郭锐, "衍推和否定", 世界汉语教学, (2) (2006)
- 刘彬, "疑问与感叹的相关性及其转化机制", 世界汉语教学, (1) (2020)
- 刘彬, "疑问和否定的相通性及其条件与机制", 湖北大学学报(哲学社会科学版), (3) (2022)
- 刘丞, "非句法结构反问形式的演化及其动因与机制", 博士, pp.2014
- 刘红妮, "关于“一律”词汇化、语法化演变过程的认知与阐释", 西华大学学报(哲学社会科学版), (6) (2007)
- 刘红妮, "汉语非句法结构的词汇化", 博士, pp.2009
- 刘红妮, "“哪怕”的词汇化", 南开语言学刊, (1) (2010)
- 芦曼, "“哪怕P也Q”句式研究", 硕士, pp.2020
- 吕叔湘, "现代汉语八百词" (2009), 商务印书馆
- 冉永平, "语言顺应论视角下反问句的人际语用功能研究", 现代外语, (4) (2008)
- 沈家煊, "跟副词“还”有关的两个句式", 中国语文, (6) (2001)
- 沈家煊, "不对称和标记论" (1999), 江西教育出版社
- 石慧敏, "隐性语义等级序列的激活机制及其语篇整合效应", 世界汉语教学, (4) (2014)
- 邢福义, "汉语复句研究" (2001), 商务印书馆
- 袁毓林, "试析"连"字句的信息结构特点", 语言科学, (2) (2006)
- 雍茜, "违实条件句的类型学研究", 外国语(上海外国语大学学报), (3) (2014)
- 周晓林, "假设连词“哪怕”的演变及其动因", 宁夏大学学报(人文社会科学版), (1) (2009)
- Fauconnier, G., "Pragmatic Scales and Logical Structure", Linguistic Inquiry (1975)
- Fillmore, C. J., "Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone", Language, 64 (1988)
- Kay, P., "Even", Linguistics and Philosophy, 13 (1990)
- König, E., "Conditionals, Concessive Conditionals and Concessives: Area of Contrast, Overlap and Neutralization" (1986)
- König, E., "Concessive Clauses" (2006)
- König, E., "Clause Integration in German and Dutch Conditionals, Concessive Conditionals, and Concessives" (1988)
- Verschueren, J., "Understanding Pragmatics" (2000), Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, Edward Arnold