민족어의 타동성과 형태(·)통사부-유형론적 접근-
A Study on Transitivity and Morpho (·) Syntactic Component in Korean
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The proto-transitivityhas been recognized since the early stages of Korean grammatical research. The NPphrases which take accusative marker ‘ul/lul’ have been recognizied as typical transitivity. Moreover the lul/ul NP(including adverbial phrase) which have been attached tointransitive verbs had been treated as transitive constructions. However, I think thatthose constructions should be treated as psydo-transitive constructions. The Koreantransitivities are realized in four components grammatical components. Firstly, [±transitivity]are realized by alternation of suffixes in word-formation components. Secondly,[±transivity] are taken and lost by attachment of affixes in morphosyntactic components. Thirdly, [±transitivity] are expressed by alternation of suffixes in inflectional components. Fourthly, when heads function as objects of preceding gerund -n in the relative clauses,prefinal endings -o- are reaslized. In other words, Korean transivities are identified wordformationcomponent, morphological component and morphosyntactic component. These facts offer a ground for establishment of morphosyntactic component in addition to morphological component and syntactic component. Korean transitivity could bespotlighted cross-linguistically. There are many phenomina to be illuminated and shouldbe still explored. Especially the markers and functions for transivity in relative verbalnoun constructions are many rooms for searches. Further more even the verbs of samemeaning could be transitives or intransitives according to languages. These problemscould be counted as a research theme of linguistic typology.
Abstract
The proto-transitivityhas been recognized since the early stages of Korean grammatical research. The NPphrases which take accusative marker ‘ul/lul’ have been recognizied as typical transitivity. Moreover the lul/ul NP(including adverbial phrase) which have been attached tointransitive verbs had been treated as transitive constructions. However, I think thatthose constructions should be treated as psydo-transitive constructions. The Koreantransitivities are realized in four components grammatical components. Firstly, [±transitivity]are realized by alternation of suffixes in word-formation components. Secondly,[±transivity] are taken and lost by attachment of affixes in morphosyntactic components. Thirdly, [±transitivity] are expressed by alternation of suffixes in inflectional components. Fourthly, when heads function as objects of preceding gerund -n in the relative clauses,prefinal endings -o- are reaslized. In other words, Korean transivities are identified wordformationcomponent, morphological component and morphosyntactic component. These facts offer a ground for establishment of morphosyntactic component in addition to morphological component and syntactic component. Korean transitivity could bespotlighted cross-linguistically. There are many phenomina to be illuminated and shouldbe still explored. Especially the markers and functions for transivity in relative verbalnoun constructions are many rooms for searches. Further more even the verbs of samemeaning could be transitives or intransitives according to languages. These problemscould be counted as a research theme of linguistic typology.
참고문헌 (46)
- 고영근, "중세어의 어미 활용에 나타나는 ‘거", 어’의 교체, 1980, pp.9, ~
- 고영근, "형태 자질과 통사 구조의 상관성에 대하여", 역사언어학, pp.77~87 (1985)
- 고영근, "Zum Verhälnis zwischen morphologische Merkmalen und syntaktischen Strukturen", SAIS Arbeitsberichte, 8 (1985)
- 고영근, "능격성과 국어의 통사 구조", 한글, 192 (1986)
- 고영근, "우리말의 총체서술과 문법체계" (1993), 집문당
- 고영근, "한국어의 타동성과 능격성에 대하여", ICKL, 10 (1996)
- 고영근, "국어형태론연구(증보판)" (1999), 서울대학교 출판부
- 고영근, "형태소의 교체와 형태론의 범위 -형태음운론적 교체를 중심으로-", 國語學, (46), pp.19~52 (2005), 국어학회
- 고영근, "단어 문장 텍스트(보정판)" (2004), 한국문화사
- 고영근, "언어 유형론과 개별 언어의 문법 기술", 관악어문연구, 34 (2009)
- 고영근, "표준 중세국어문법론(제3판)" (2010), 집문당
- 고영근, "중세국어의 시상과 서법(제4판)" (2011), 집문당
- 고영근, "우리말 문법론" (2008), 집문당
- 김경열, "A Study on Transitivity in Korean", 현대문법연구, (70), pp.73~105 (2012), 현대문법학회
- 김두봉, "조선말본", ~ (1916)
- 김두봉, "깁더 조선말본", ~ (1922)
- 남기심, "표준 국어문법론(제3판)" (2011), 탑출판사
- 박병수, "한국어의 격현상연구", 태학사 (2004)
- 박승빈, "조선어학", ~ (1935)
- 박진호, "형태론의 제 자리 찾기", 형태론, 1(2) (1999)
- 백두현, "고려시대 釋讀口訣의 선어말어미 (오)의 분포와 문법 기능", 어문논총, 30 (1996)
- 백두현, "고려시대 釋讀口訣의 선어말어미(오)에 대한 통사적 고찰", 진단학보, 83 (1996)
- 백두현, "석독구결의 문자체계와 기능" (2005), 한국문화사
- 양정호, "선어말어미 ‘-오-’와 형식명사", 형태론, 1(1) (1999)
- 양정호, "동명사 구성의 ‘-오-’ 연구" (2003)
- 연재훈, "기능 - 유형 문법에서의 분석과 설명", 언어학, (17), pp.203~230 (1995), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 연재훈, "국어 여격 주어 구문에 대한 범언어적 관점의 연구", 국어학, 28 (1996)
- 연재훈, "타동성의 정의를 위한 원형이론적 접근", 언어, 22 (1997)
- 연재훈, "Korean Grammatical Constructions : Their Form and Meaning" (2003), Saffron
- 유길준, "대한문전", ~ (1909)
- 유동석, "국어의 매개변인문법" (1995), 신구문화사
- 전정례, "새로운 ‘-오-’ 연구" (1995), 한국문화사
- 정렬모, "신편 고등국어문법", ~ (1946)
- 정인승, "표준고등말본", ~ (1956)
- 조선민주주의 인민 공화국 과학원 언어문학연구소 언어학 연구소, "조선어문법 1" (1960), 과학원 출판사
- 조선민주주의 인민 공화국 과학원 언어문학연구소 언어학 연구소, "조선어문법 2" (1963), 과학원 출판사
- 최기용, "한국어 격과 조사의 생성통사론" (2008), 한국문화사
- 최현배, "우리말본" (1971), 정음문화사
- 허 웅, "揷入母音考", 서울대학교 논문집, 7 (1958)
- 허 웅, "우리 엣말본" (1975), 샘문화사
- 홍기문, "조선문법연구", ~ (1947)
- F. Jack, "Grammaire Structurale de L’allemand" (1993), P. Lang
- H. Weinrich, "Tempus, Besprochene und erzählte Welt" (1977), Kohlhammer
- H. Weinrich, "Tempus, Besprochene und erzählte Welt" (2001), Verlag C. H. Beck
- I. A, Mečuk, "Cours de Linguistique Générale" (1996), Presses de l’Université de Montréal
- R. King, "Toward a history of transitivity in Korean", Proceeding of Conference on the Theory and Practice of Historical Linguistics (1988), University of Chicago Special Publications in Linguistics 21