부정 요소‘안’과 용언의 결합 제약에 대한 통계적 분석
A Statistical Analysis of the Restrictions in Combining the Negative Element 'an' and Verbs (Adjectives)
1
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Korean Journal of Linguistics, 39-1, 1-25. Korean has two forms (elements) of negation: a short form ('an') and a long form ('ahda'). Among the two forms, the short form shows some restrictions on combination with a verb/adjective. Although there have been several anecdotal suggestions on the restrictions, a thorough study based on the availability of the short form 'an' with verbs/adjectives is still in need. This paper tries to analyze the restrictions of negative forms (with respect to the relevant verbs/adjectives) in statistical methods, on the basis of a corpus of 15 millions words (the Sejong Korean Corpus). By logistic regression analysis, five factors―word origin (Korean proper, Chinese), syllable length, part of speech (verb, adjective), '-ha' verb or not, and frequency of use― all turn out to be significant, in that order. We also consider diachronic facts and discuss the findings from the viewpoint of Cognitive Linguistics, a usage-based theory.
Abstract
Korean Journal of Linguistics, 39-1, 1-25. Korean has two forms (elements) of negation: a short form ('an') and a long form ('ahda'). Among the two forms, the short form shows some restrictions on combination with a verb/adjective. Although there have been several anecdotal suggestions on the restrictions, a thorough study based on the availability of the short form 'an' with verbs/adjectives is still in need. This paper tries to analyze the restrictions of negative forms (with respect to the relevant verbs/adjectives) in statistical methods, on the basis of a corpus of 15 millions words (the Sejong Korean Corpus). By logistic regression analysis, five factors―word origin (Korean proper, Chinese), syllable length, part of speech (verb, adjective), '-ha' verb or not, and frequency of use― all turn out to be significant, in that order. We also consider diachronic facts and discuss the findings from the viewpoint of Cognitive Linguistics, a usage-based theory.
참고문헌 (25)
- 강범모, "한국어의 텍스트 장르와 언어 특성" (1999), 고려대학교 출판부
- 강범모, "통계적 방법에 의한 한국어 텍스트 유형 및 문체 분석", 언어학, (22), pp.3~57 (1998), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 고영근, "표준 중세국어문법론" (2010), 집문당
- 고영근, "우리말 문법론" (2008), 집문당
- 김동식, "현대 국어 부정법의 연구", 국어연구, 42 (1980)
- 김동욱, "한일 대조분석을 통한 민법 조문 ‘장형 부정’의 ‘단형 부정’으로의 전환 가능성 여부", 일어일문학연구, 59(1), pp.53~72 (2006), 한국일어일문학회
- 21세기 세종계획 국어기초자료구축 연구보고서, "김흥규", 문화관광부, ~ (2007)
- 문순덕, "제주 방언의 단형 부정문 소고", 언어학연구, 3, pp.65~80 (1998)
- 박상수, "한국어 부정 요소 ‘아니하-’와 ‘아니’의 변화에 대한 통시적 분석", 언어과학연구, (58), pp.71~92 (2011), 언어과학회
- 서정수, "국어문법" (1996), 한양대학교 출판원
- 안예리, "‘1음절 한자어+하다’ 용언의 통시적 변화 - 말뭉치 언어학적 접근 -", 한국어학, 58, pp.107~133 (2013), 한국어학회
- 오선화, "연변지역어의 부정소에 관한 일고찰－단형 부정문에서의 위치를 중심으로", 어문연구, 55, pp.31~50 (2007), 어문연구학회
- 이기용, "두 가지 부정문의 동의성 여부에 대하여", 국어학, 8, pp.59~94 (1979)
- 이지영, "否定副詞 ‘안’과 否定敍述語 ‘않-’의 형성", 어문연구(語文硏究), 32(3), pp.165~186 (2004), 한국어문교육연구회
- 조경숙, "6개 언어의 부정에 관한 통사 유형적 비교-영어, 프랑스어, 러시아어, 한국어, 일본어, 중국어에 관하여", 언어학, (41), pp.237~266 (2005), 사단법인 한국언어학회
- 임홍빈, "부정법 논의와 국어의 현실", 국어학, 6, pp.185~206 (1978)
- Baayen, R. H., "Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R" (2008), Cambridge University Press
- Bresnan, J., "Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation", pp.69~94 (2007), Royal Netherlands Academy of Science
- Bybee, Joan, "The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics", pp.945~987 (2007), Oxford University Press
- 하이네, "The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis", pp.826~855 (2010), Oxford University Press
- Croft, William, "Cognitive Linguistics" (2004), Cambridge University Press
- Geeraerts, Dirk, "The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Grondelaers, Stefan, "The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics", pp.988~1011 (2007), Oxford University Press
- Johnson, Keith, "Quantitative Methods in Linguistics" (2008), Blackwell Publishing
- "A Langugue and Environment for Statistical Computing"[URL]