입말에 담긴 부름말 ‘어이’의 문법화
The Grammaticalization of Summons ‘eoi’ in Spoken Languages
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The grammaticalization of summons is a kind of the grammaticalization of the spoken languages. All of the grammaticalized summons as a discourse marker are used in one's juniors. Among these discourse markers, ‘eoi1’ is a one of the most grammaticalized summons. The summons ‘eoi1’ has the different functions in conformity with the degree of the grammaticalization. First, the summons ‘eoi1’ is grammaticalized into a discourse marker. When grammaticalized as a discourse marker, it's form sometimes became a ‘eoi2’, ‘ei' or ‘ii1'. When the summons ‘eoi1’ is grammaticalized as a discourse marker, it does not function as summons. Rather, it shows that the speaker wants the listener to have an interest in or pay attention to what the speaker says. Second, as ‘eoi2’/‘ei'/‘ii1' grammaticalized as a discourse marker are frequently used after the conjunctive endings or the sentence endings, they are more grammaticalized into a discourse marker, ‘ii2'. When the discourse marker ‘ii1' is more grammaticalized into a discourse marker ‘ii2', its meaning becomes more abstract. In other words, it has a function showing an attitude of a speaker who treats a listener with an intimate relationship, needless to say that it causes a listener an attention or an interest. These characteristics of spoken language indicate that a sentence of spoken language has a structure which a discourse marker performing a mordal function is once again added to a sentence of written language. Third, when a discourse marker ‘ii2' is most grammaticalized, it was fossilized at a precedent endings and then forms dialectic endings. In this case, we have a difficulty in recognizing a discourse marker ‘ii2' and the mordal function which a discourse marker ‘ii2' assumes also disappears. Dialectic endings formed through these procedures are as follows: ‘-aseori', ‘-adagaseori', ‘-goseori', ‘-eomyeonseori', ‘-eoseollamuni', ‘-eoniggani,', ‘-eoiggai', ‘-rae', etc. Above mentioned grammar related with the grammaticalization of summons ‘eoi1’ may allow us to extend our understanding of not only the universality and uniqueness of grammaticalization of Korean language but also a dialectical ending which is a spoken language of Korean.
Abstract
The grammaticalization of summons is a kind of the grammaticalization of the spoken languages. All of the grammaticalized summons as a discourse marker are used in one's juniors. Among these discourse markers, ‘eoi1’ is a one of the most grammaticalized summons. The summons ‘eoi1’ has the different functions in conformity with the degree of the grammaticalization. First, the summons ‘eoi1’ is grammaticalized into a discourse marker. When grammaticalized as a discourse marker, it's form sometimes became a ‘eoi2’, ‘ei' or ‘ii1'. When the summons ‘eoi1’ is grammaticalized as a discourse marker, it does not function as summons. Rather, it shows that the speaker wants the listener to have an interest in or pay attention to what the speaker says. Second, as ‘eoi2’/‘ei'/‘ii1' grammaticalized as a discourse marker are frequently used after the conjunctive endings or the sentence endings, they are more grammaticalized into a discourse marker, ‘ii2'. When the discourse marker ‘ii1' is more grammaticalized into a discourse marker ‘ii2', its meaning becomes more abstract. In other words, it has a function showing an attitude of a speaker who treats a listener with an intimate relationship, needless to say that it causes a listener an attention or an interest. These characteristics of spoken language indicate that a sentence of spoken language has a structure which a discourse marker performing a mordal function is once again added to a sentence of written language. Third, when a discourse marker ‘ii2' is most grammaticalized, it was fossilized at a precedent endings and then forms dialectic endings. In this case, we have a difficulty in recognizing a discourse marker ‘ii2' and the mordal function which a discourse marker ‘ii2' assumes also disappears. Dialectic endings formed through these procedures are as follows: ‘-aseori', ‘-adagaseori', ‘-goseori', ‘-eomyeonseori', ‘-eoseollamuni', ‘-eoniggani,', ‘-eoiggai', ‘-rae', etc. Above mentioned grammar related with the grammaticalization of summons ‘eoi1’ may allow us to extend our understanding of not only the universality and uniqueness of grammaticalization of Korean language but also a dialectical ending which is a spoken language of Korean.
참고문헌 (29)
- 강우원, "경남 방언의 부름말 실현 양상과 문화적 특성", 언어과학, 15(2), pp.1~20 (2008), 한국언어과학회
- 고영진, "한국어의 문법화 과정-풀이씨의 경우" (1997), 국학자료원
- 권재일, "경북방언의 문장종결조사 {이}에 대하여", 인문과학연구, pp.219~235 (1982)
- 김정대, "경남 창원 지역의 언어와 생활" (2007), 태학사
- 김종택, "국어 화용론" (1982), 형설출판사
- 김태엽, "국어 부름말의 문법", 우리말글, 29, pp.107~127 (2003), 우리말글학회
- 徐正旭, "大邱 방언 서법 體系 硏究", 석사, pp.1982
- 서태룡, "감탄사의 담화 기능과 범주", 동악어문논집, 35, pp.21~49 (1999), 동악어문학회
- 유창돈, "이조어사전" (1964), 연세대학교 출판부
- 이기갑, "국어 방언 문법" (2003), 태학사
- 이상규, "경북 방언 문법 연구" (1999), 박이정
- 이상규, "경북방언사전" (2000), 태학사
- 이성하, "문법화의 이해" (1998), 한국문화사
- 전영옥, "구어 원시 말뭉치 구축 방법, ‘한국어 구어 연구 (1)’" (2002), 연새대학교 언어정보개발 연구원, 한국문화사
- 정영주, "경상도 토씨 연구-진주지역어를 중심으로" (1993), 홍문각
- 천시권, "경북방언의 형태론적 고찰", 청계 김사엽박사 송수기념 논총 (1973)
- 임규홍, "경상방언 담화표지 ‘아이가’에 대한 연구", 어문학, (104), pp.141~177 (2009), 한국어문학회
- 임규홍, "경상방언 담화표지 ‘마’에 대한 연구", 배달말, (48), pp.1~33 (2011), 배달말학회
- 최명옥, "경북 동해안 방언 연구" (1980), 영남대학교출판부
- 한영목, "충남 방언 문법" (2008), 집문당
- 한진건, "륙진 방언 연구" (2000), 민족출판사
- 허웅, "우리 옛말본" (1975), 샘문화사
- 황대화, "동해안 방언 연구" (1986), 김일성종합대학출판사
- 황대화, "조선어 동서방언 비교연구" (1998), 과학백과사전종합출판사
- 황병순, "담화 표지 연구에 드러난 몇 가지 의문", 배달말, (47), pp.115~135 (2010), 배달말학회
- 황병순, "‘-으니까’ 방언형의 형태론", 방언학, (15), pp.75~112 (2012), 한국방언학회[DOI]
- 황병순, "방언 어말어미의 형태적 특성 연구-입말 형태 화석형을 중심으로-", 배달말, (51), pp.1~43 (2012), 배달말학회
- 황병순, "담화표지의 접속어미화에 대한 연구", 國語學, (65), pp.347~376 (2012), 국어학회
- Hoper, Paul J., "On Some Principles of Grammaticalization", In Traugott & Heine, 1, pp.17~35 (1991)
