韩汉在过去时间概念表达特点上的对比研究
A Contrastive Study of Past in Korean and Chinese
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This work investigates if Chinese has a past tense as a grammatical category or no t，and also what are the major linguistic methods to mark the notion of past in Chinese. We selected one of the most widely read Korean written novel and its Chinese translation in as a corpus for our comparative analysis. We extracted sentences which include ‘-었-’ or ‘-었었-’ from Korean data and their corresponding sentences in the Chinese data. Then for Chinese sentences，we annotated what methods each sentence uses to express the notion of past，among the eight types of methods which have been observed as a past tense marker by previous studies. These methods are zero marking，lexical expression，temporal adverb，mei+V，resultative phrase，aspect markers le/zhe/guo，V+de，and sentence final particles le2/laizhe. Then each marker was ranked according to their frequency: the most frequently used method is zero marking，followed by aspect markers+mei，then by resultative phrase. The least frequently used methods are ‘de’ to begin with，followed by temporal adverb and sentence final particle le2. Our statistics demonstrates different weight of each past marker in Chinese. Next，we classified each marker into three different types，namely，syntactic，lexical and pragmatic categories，and the ratio between these three categories is 42:19:39. This result indicates that Chinese sentences rely on grammatical method with 42% of weigh t，lexical method with 19% of weight and pragmatic method with 39% of weight when expressing the notion of past. Our statistics supports the hypothesis that Chinese does not have a grammatical category of Tense which includes Past as its subcategory. Furthermore，based on the statistics，this study also provides some useful suggestions for teaching and learning regarding how to express the notion of past when dealing with verbs denoting various aspectual properties in Chinese. The statistical analysis drawn from Korean-Chinese comparative corpus in this work sheds light on the study of Tense in Chinese as well as the study of pedagogy for Tense and Aspect of Chinese.
Abstract
This work investigates if Chinese has a past tense as a grammatical category or no t，and also what are the major linguistic methods to mark the notion of past in Chinese. We selected one of the most widely read Korean written novel and its Chinese translation in as a corpus for our comparative analysis. We extracted sentences which include ‘-었-’ or ‘-었었-’ from Korean data and their corresponding sentences in the Chinese data. Then for Chinese sentences，we annotated what methods each sentence uses to express the notion of past，among the eight types of methods which have been observed as a past tense marker by previous studies. These methods are zero marking，lexical expression，temporal adverb，mei+V，resultative phrase，aspect markers le/zhe/guo，V+de，and sentence final particles le2/laizhe. Then each marker was ranked according to their frequency: the most frequently used method is zero marking，followed by aspect markers+mei，then by resultative phrase. The least frequently used methods are ‘de’ to begin with，followed by temporal adverb and sentence final particle le2. Our statistics demonstrates different weight of each past marker in Chinese. Next，we classified each marker into three different types，namely，syntactic，lexical and pragmatic categories，and the ratio between these three categories is 42:19:39. This result indicates that Chinese sentences rely on grammatical method with 42% of weigh t，lexical method with 19% of weight and pragmatic method with 39% of weight when expressing the notion of past. Our statistics supports the hypothesis that Chinese does not have a grammatical category of Tense which includes Past as its subcategory. Furthermore，based on the statistics，this study also provides some useful suggestions for teaching and learning regarding how to express the notion of past when dealing with verbs denoting various aspectual properties in Chinese. The statistical analysis drawn from Korean-Chinese comparative corpus in this work sheds light on the study of Tense in Chinese as well as the study of pedagogy for Tense and Aspect of Chinese.
참고문헌 (48)
- 김석득, "한국어의 시간과 시상", 한불연구, 1 (1974), 한불문화연구회. 연세대
- 김제열, "한국어교육에서 시간 표현 요소의 문법적 기술 방법 연구", 한국어교육, 14(1), pp.3~76 (2003), 국제한국어교육학회
- 김차균, "우리말의 시제 구조와 상 인식" (1999), 태학사
- 남기심, "현대국어 시제에 관한 문제", 국어국문학, (55-57) (1972), 국어국문학회
- 남기심, "이른바 국어시제의 기준시점 문제에 대하여", 한국학논집, 3 (1975), 계명대한국학연구소
- 서정수, "국어문법" (1994), 뿌리깊은나무
- 신경숙, "엄마를 부탁해" (2008), 창비
- 양정석, "시상성과 논항연결" (2002), 태학사
- 양정석, "무시제 가설 하에서의 시간 해석 방법", 배달말, (43), pp.121~178 (2008), 배달말학회
- 양동휘, "국어 관형절의 시제", 한글, (162) (1978), 한글학회
- 이명정, "现代汉语“无体貌动词”初探", 중국문학, 77, pp.221~251 (2013), 한국중국어문학회
- 이익섭, "상대 시제에 대하여", 관악어문연구, 3 (1978), 서울대 국어국문학과
- 이재성, "한국어의 시제와 상" (2001), 국학자료원
- 왕례량, "한국어와 중국어의 시간요소 연구에 대하여", 중국학연구, (52), pp.26~46 (2010), 중국학연구회
- 王清棟, "중국인 한국어 학습자의 시제표현 교수방안", 韓國學研究論文集, 1, pp.227~247 (2012)
- 최동주, "국어 접속문에서의 시제 현상", 국어학, 24 (1994), 국어학회
- 최현배, "우리말본" (1971), 정음문화사
- 한동완, "현대국어 시제의 체계적 연구", 한국어연구, 6 (1984), 서강대 국문과
- 한동완, "국어의 시제 연구" (1996), 태학사
- 白峰子, "白峰子韩国语语法词典" (2008), 世界图书出版公司
- 曹敏, "汉语表达“过去”的手段", 硕士, pp.2011
- 崔珉琼, "针对韩国人的汉语“过去时”的教学对策", 硕士, pp.2012
- 陈平, "论汉语时间系统的三元结构", 中国语文, (6) (1988)
- 戴耀晶, "現代漢語時體系統研究" (1997), 浙江教育出版社
- 高明凯, "漢語語法論" (1986), 商務印書館
- 龚千炎, "汉语的时相时制时态" (1995), 商务印书馆出版
- 关玲, "后置时间词刍议", 世界汉语教学, (3) (2009)
- 黎錦熙, "新著國語文法" (2000), 商務印書館
- 李臨定, "現代漢語動詞" (1990), 中國社會科學出版社
- 李铁根, "“了”、“着”、“过”与汉语时制的表达", 语言研究, (3) (2002)
- 李铁根, "“不”、“没（有）”的用法及其所受的时间制约", 汉语学习, (2) (2003)
- 林若望, "論現代漢語的時制意義", 第七届国际中国语言与语言学研讨会 (2002)
- 刘勋宁, "现代汉语句尾“了”的语法意义及其解说", 世界汉语教学, (3) (2002)
- 刘月华, "实用现代汉语语法" (2001), 商务印书馆
- 陆庆和, "实用对外汉语教学语法" (2006), 北京大学出版社
- 申京淑, "妈妈，你在哪里？" (2013), 人民文学出版社
- 宋玉柱, "關於時間助詞“的”和“來著”", 中國語文, (4) (1981)
- 王力, "中國現代語法" (2000), 中華書局
- 邢福义, "语言学概论" (2002), 华中师范大学出版社
- 张济卿, "汉语并非没有时制语法范畴——谈时、体研究中的几个问题", 语文研究, (4) (1996)
- 张济卿, "论现代汉语的时制与体结构（上）", 语文研究, (3) (1998)
- 张济卿, "论现代汉语的时制与体结构（下）", 语文研究, (4) (1998)
- 张谊生, "现代汉语副词探索" (2004), 学林出版社出版
- 朱德熙, "语法讲义" (1982), 商务印书馆
- 左思民, "試論“體”的本質屬性", 漢語學習, 4 (1998)
- 左思民, "現代漢語中“體”的研究-兼及體研究的類型學意義", 語文研究, (1) (1999)
- Comrie，Bernard, "Tense" (1985), Cambridge University Press
- Lin，Jingxia, "The syntax of multi-morpheme motion construction in Chinese: An analysis based on scale structure", Studies in Language, 35(2), pp.337~379 (2011)