Use of Concessive and Contrastive Constructions in English and Korean
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this research is to compare the use of concessive and contrastive constructions in English and Korean by analyzing two passages each in English and Korean bibles. Concessives, which are defined as realizations of the meaning of concession, or contrary to expectations, are more often used in Korean than in English. Contrastives, which are defined as realizations of the meaning of contrast or relational logical opposition, occur more frequently in English than in Korean. Concessives employ more various forms than contrastives and both languages normally leave the meaning or implication unspecified when they don't realize the meaning of concession or contrast; Korean uses the syntactic connector -ko(and) instead of contrastive forms when not realizing the meaning of contrast while English utilizes asyndetic constructions when not realizing the concessive meaning. Analyzing the matches of the two languages' concessives by the types of forms unveils that there are mixed matches between the types except for the English although type, most of which correspond to the Korean although type concessives. None of the other types show a one-to-one correspondence between the two languages. Notably, a lot of the even type in English correspond to the although type in Korean and most of the Korean although type have but type counterparts in English.
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to compare the use of concessive and contrastive constructions in English and Korean by analyzing two passages each in English and Korean bibles. Concessives, which are defined as realizations of the meaning of concession, or contrary to expectations, are more often used in Korean than in English. Contrastives, which are defined as realizations of the meaning of contrast or relational logical opposition, occur more frequently in English than in Korean. Concessives employ more various forms than contrastives and both languages normally leave the meaning or implication unspecified when they don't realize the meaning of concession or contrast; Korean uses the syntactic connector -ko(and) instead of contrastive forms when not realizing the meaning of contrast while English utilizes asyndetic constructions when not realizing the concessive meaning. Analyzing the matches of the two languages' concessives by the types of forms unveils that there are mixed matches between the types except for the English although type, most of which correspond to the Korean although type concessives. None of the other types show a one-to-one correspondence between the two languages. Notably, a lot of the even type in English correspond to the although type in Korean and most of the Korean although type have but type counterparts in English.
참고문헌 (39)
- Bak, Sung-Yun, "Yangpowa coken (Concession and condition)", Tamhwawa Inci (Discourse and Cognition), 14(1) (2007)
- Barth, D., "that's true, although not really, but still: Expressing concession in spoken English in: Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives" (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Bennett, J., "Even if", Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, pp.403~418 (1982)
- Choi, Kyu-Ryun, "Kuke chumka chocemsauy uymi -yeksiwa - tolul cungsimuylo (Meaning of Korean additive focus markers focusing on -yeksi and -to)", Hankuke Uymihak (Korean Semantics), 8, pp.291~321 (2001)
- Couper-Kuhlen, E., "Concessive patterns in conversation in: Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives" (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Crevels, M., "Concessives on different semantic levels: A typological perspective in: Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives" (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Declerck, R., "Some truths and nontruths about even if", Linguistics, 39, pp.203~255 (2001)
- Edgington, D., "On conditionals", Mind, 104, pp.235~329 (1995)
- ""Conditionals", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy"[URL]
- Fauconnier, G., "Pragmatic scales and logical structure", Linguistic Inquiry, 6, pp.353~373 (1975)
- Fillmore, C. J., "Studies in Linguistic Semantics" (1971), Holt, Rinehart and Winston
- Fillmore, C. J., "Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The Case of Let Alone", Language, 64, pp.501~538 (1988)
- Entailment rules in a semantic theory, "Fillmore, J.", Ohio State University, ~, pp.POLA Report 10 (1965)
- Francescotti, R. M., "Even: The conventional implicature approach reconsidered", Linguistics and Philosophy, 18, pp.153~173 (1995)
- Grice, H. P., "Logic and conversation in: Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts" (1975), Academic Press
- Harper, W. L., "Ifs" (1981), Reidel
- Horn, L., "A presuppositional analysis of Only and Even", Papers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (1969), University of Chicago, Department of Linguistics
- Huddleston, R., "The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Jackson, F., "Conditionals" (1987), Basil Blackwell
- Karttunen, L., "Conventional implicature in: Syntax and Semantics 3: Presupposition" (1979), Academic Press
- Kay, P., "Even", Linguistics and Philosophy, 13, pp.59~111 (1990)
- Kim, Yong-Beom, "Hancengsa -touy uymi hwayonglon (Semantic and pragmatic aspects of the delimiter -to)", Enewa cengpo (Language and Information), 3, pp.85~96 (1999)
- Kim, Yong-Beom, "On concession", Language and Information, 6(1), pp.71~89 (2002)
- König, E., "Conditionals, concessive conditionals, and concessives: areas of contrast, overlap and neutralization in: On Conditionals" (1986), Cambridge University Press
- König, E., "Concessive connectives and concessive sentences: cross-linguistic regularities and pragmatic principle in: Explaining Language Universals" (1988), Blackwell
- König, E., "Causal and concessive clauses: formal and semantic relations in: Cause, Condition, Concession, Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives" (2000), Mouton de Gruyter
- Lakoff, R., "If's, And's, and But's about conjunction in: Studies in Linguistic Semantics" (1971), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
- Lee, Chungmin, "Negative polarity items in Korean and Japanese: A contrastive study", Bilingual Research, 22 (2003)
- Lee, Kidong, "A study of conjunctive markers of contrast and concession", Language Research, 18(2) (1977)
- Lee, Yae-Sheik, "Scalar implicature in update semantics", Journal of Language Sciences, 6(2) (1999)
- Lee, Yae-Sheik, "Is the focus particle -to in Korean a concessive or an additive marker?", Language and Information, 6(2) (2002)
- Levinson, S. C., "Pragmatics" (1983), Cambridge University Press
- Lycan, W., "Even and Even if", Linguistics and Philosophy, 14 (1991)
- Quirk, R., "A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language" (1985), Longman
- Rudolph, E., "Contrast: Adversative and Concessive Relations and Their Expressions in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese on Sentence and Text Level (Research in Text Theory)" (1996), Walter de Gruyter
- Seo, Jungsub, "A Study on Korean Concessives", 박사, pp.1991
- Stalnaker, R., ""A theory of conditionals", in Studies in Logical Theory, American Philosophical Quarterly Monograph Series, 2" (1968), Blackwell
- Sweetser, E., "From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Yoo, Susun, "Situation Semantics and Extended Grammar" (1989), Hanshin Publishing Company