본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

漢語動詞の使役文 –「sikida・ge hada」形との対応関係を中心に–

A Study of Causative Construction of Chinese character Verbs in Japanese and Korean -By Focusing on 「sikida・ge hada」 Type-

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류일본어와문학

초록

Causative construction of Chinese character verb Korean has a “sikida” form as Chinese verb-only format in addition to the form “ge hada”. Furthermore, it is also derived in the form of a causative construction of general verb to “ge hada” form. In this paper, while keeping in mind the overall picture of Chinese character verb in Korean, to target the causative form of the two, practice comparative analysis of semantic feature and the establishment of each format. Further, as a result of the analysis to a double causative construction, it is possible to present the following conclusions. 1) It is divided into [A-2] type and [A-1] type by causative form of Chinese character verb “sikida”, “saseru” form to become a transitive construction or causative construction.[A-2] type is subclassified to [A-2-1]type which becomes transitive verb in the corresponding spontaneous causative construction and [A-2-2] Type representing a similar meaning of “Chinese character word + suru” form “Chinese character word + saseru” form. 2) In the case of Korean “sikida” form, in [K-A-1] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the causative and transitive verb, “ge hada” form represents the meaning of the typical causative. The [K-A-2-1] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the transitive verb, and “ge hada” form represents meaning of spontaneous causative construction. The [K-A-2-2] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the transitive verb, and “ge hada” form becomes to make sense of the indirect event realization. 3) In case of Korean, double causative construction is established, so “sikige hada” form is established from the transitive construction [K-A-1] type, [K-A-2-1] type, and [K-A-2-2] type. 4) For Japanese, double causative is not satisfied from [J-A-1] type, “saseruyounisuru” form is derived from [J-A-2-2] type and [J-A-2-1] type.

Abstract

Causative construction of Chinese character verb Korean has a “sikida” form as Chinese verb-only format in addition to the form “ge hada”. Furthermore, it is also derived in the form of a causative construction of general verb to “ge hada” form. In this paper, while keeping in mind the overall picture of Chinese character verb in Korean, to target the causative form of the two, practice comparative analysis of semantic feature and the establishment of each format. Further, as a result of the analysis to a double causative construction, it is possible to present the following conclusions. 1) It is divided into [A-2] type and [A-1] type by causative form of Chinese character verb “sikida”, “saseru” form to become a transitive construction or causative construction.[A-2] type is subclassified to [A-2-1]type which becomes transitive verb in the corresponding spontaneous causative construction and [A-2-2] Type representing a similar meaning of “Chinese character word + suru” form “Chinese character word + saseru” form. 2) In the case of Korean “sikida” form, in [K-A-1] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the causative and transitive verb, “ge hada” form represents the meaning of the typical causative. The [K-A-2-1] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the transitive verb, and “ge hada” form represents meaning of spontaneous causative construction. The [K-A-2-2] type, “sikida” form represents the meaning of the transitive verb, and “ge hada” form becomes to make sense of the indirect event realization. 3) In case of Korean, double causative construction is established, so “sikige hada” form is established from the transitive construction [K-A-1] type, [K-A-2-1] type, and [K-A-2-2] type. 4) For Japanese, double causative is not satisfied from [J-A-1] type, “saseruyounisuru” form is derived from [J-A-2-2] type and [J-A-2-1] type.

참고문헌 (18)

  1. "세종말뭉치 2010年版", ~
  2. "毎日新聞 2006年版", ~
  3. "Yahoo検索"[URL]
  4. "Naver検索"[URL]
  5. ウェスリー・M・ヤコブセン, "日本語学新展開", pp.213~248 (1989), くろしお出版
  6. 景山太郎, "動詞の意味と構文", pp.183~205 (2001), 大修館書店
  7. 定延利之, "日本語の?ォイスと他動性", pp.123~147 (1991), くろしお出版
  8. 丸田忠雄, "使役動詞のアナトミー", pp.94~184 (1998), 松柏社
  9. 권승림, "他動詞と使役性", 일본학보, 42, pp.1~17 (1999), 한국일본학회
  10. 권승림, "日本語の自発文の研究", 日本学報, 49 (2001), 韓国日本学会
  11. 권승림, "自発使役文の分析", 日本言語文化, 1, pp.27~49 (2002), 日本言語文化学会
  12. 권승림, "일본어 사역표현 재고 - 문법이론의 교육적 활용을 지향하며 -", 일본연구, 21, pp.439~458 (2003), 일본연구소
  13. 권승림, "他動性再考 -使役性との境界的意味を中心として-", 일본연구, (23), pp.425~443 (2004), 일본연구소
  14. 권승림, "原因使役文について -自發使役文との比較分析-", 일어일문학연구, 51(2), pp.213~227 (2004), 한국일어일문학회
  15. 권승림, "認識·感情動詞의 使役文", 日本語文學, 1(35), pp.37~56 (2007), 한국일본어문학회
  16. 권승림, "使役行為の類型と使役形式 -韓国語との対照的観点から-", 일본어학연구, 26, pp.1~14 (2009), 한국일본어학회
  17. 권승림, "誘導使役について -日・韓対照研究 -", 일본어문학, (48), pp.1~20 (2010), 일본어문학회
  18. 김경수, "日・韓両言語における漢語動詞の対応関係: 記述文法を中心に", 日本語敎育, 56(56), pp.127~141 (2011), 한국일본어교육학회

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (23건)