한·중·일 ‘自己’ 관련 어휘 비교 연구 ― 트랜스-동아시아 언어 연구의 일례
A study on ‘自己’-related words in East Asian languages ― An example of trans-East Asian linguistic investigation
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study investigates the similarities and differences of ‘自己’-related words in Korean, Chinese, and Japanese through trans-areal linguistic investigation. As ‘自己’-related words, Korean has caki 自己 and casin 自身; Chinese has 自己; Japanese has 自己, 自ら, 己, 自身, and 自分. 自己 was frequently treated as a reflexive pronoun. However, considering the definition of reflexivization (i.e. the co-referentiality of the agent and the patient), the great majority of ‘自己’ and related words in these three languages cannot be understood as reflexive pronouns. Rather, they can best be treated as generic pronouns. 自己 in modern Chinese developed from 自 plus 己 in Archaic Chinese via disyllabicization in the East Han (25–220 A.D.) time. 自 was originally a reflexive adverb and 己 was a generic pronoun. 自己 in modern Chinese performs both the function of 自 and 己 in Archaic Chinese. Additionally, it is used in the form [Noun+自己], which is a new function that was not descended from Archaic Chinese. 自己 and 自身 in Korean and Japanese show similarities in their usages. 自己 is frequently used in a compound word, such as cakimancok (self-satisfaction), 自己流 (one’s way), whereas 自身 is used in the form [Noun+自身 ](e.g. 總理自身 ‘the minister himself’). As ‘自己’-related words, Japanese has 自己, 自ら, 己, 自身, and 自分. They show a complementary distribution in terms of their usages: 自己 and 己 are used as pronouns; 自ら is used as an emphatic reflexive adverb meaning ‘by oneself ’; 自身 is used as an emphatic reflexive adjective in the form [Noun+自身 ]; ‘自分 ’ is used as a pronoun and an emphatic reflexive adverb. The occurrences of ‘自己’ and related words in Japanese display clear linguistic strata. During the Nara-Heian and the Edo era, 自己 -type words (including 自己, 自ら, 己) occupied the great majority. During the Meiji era, the number of occurrences of 自分 increased drastically (33.34%), and it occupied by far the great majority since the Taisho-Showa era (65.19%). Meanwhile, the portion of 自身 increased steadily. This paper showed that Korean, Chinese, and Japanese do not have a discrete form as a reflexive pronoun via trans-East Asian linguistic studies. Rather, they use generic pronouns when they need to deliver reflexive meaning. Also, there are similarities and differences in terms of the syntactic behavior regarding 自己 and related words in these three languages.
Abstract
This study investigates the similarities and differences of ‘自己’-related words in Korean, Chinese, and Japanese through trans-areal linguistic investigation. As ‘自己’-related words, Korean has caki 自己 and casin 自身; Chinese has 自己; Japanese has 自己, 自ら, 己, 自身, and 自分. 自己 was frequently treated as a reflexive pronoun. However, considering the definition of reflexivization (i.e. the co-referentiality of the agent and the patient), the great majority of ‘自己’ and related words in these three languages cannot be understood as reflexive pronouns. Rather, they can best be treated as generic pronouns. 自己 in modern Chinese developed from 自 plus 己 in Archaic Chinese via disyllabicization in the East Han (25–220 A.D.) time. 自 was originally a reflexive adverb and 己 was a generic pronoun. 自己 in modern Chinese performs both the function of 自 and 己 in Archaic Chinese. Additionally, it is used in the form [Noun+自己], which is a new function that was not descended from Archaic Chinese. 自己 and 自身 in Korean and Japanese show similarities in their usages. 自己 is frequently used in a compound word, such as cakimancok (self-satisfaction), 自己流 (one’s way), whereas 自身 is used in the form [Noun+自身 ](e.g. 總理自身 ‘the minister himself’). As ‘自己’-related words, Japanese has 自己, 自ら, 己, 自身, and 自分. They show a complementary distribution in terms of their usages: 自己 and 己 are used as pronouns; 自ら is used as an emphatic reflexive adverb meaning ‘by oneself ’; 自身 is used as an emphatic reflexive adjective in the form [Noun+自身 ]; ‘自分 ’ is used as a pronoun and an emphatic reflexive adverb. The occurrences of ‘自己’ and related words in Japanese display clear linguistic strata. During the Nara-Heian and the Edo era, 自己 -type words (including 自己, 自ら, 己) occupied the great majority. During the Meiji era, the number of occurrences of 自分 increased drastically (33.34%), and it occupied by far the great majority since the Taisho-Showa era (65.19%). Meanwhile, the portion of 自身 increased steadily. This paper showed that Korean, Chinese, and Japanese do not have a discrete form as a reflexive pronoun via trans-East Asian linguistic studies. Rather, they use generic pronouns when they need to deliver reflexive meaning. Also, there are similarities and differences in terms of the syntactic behavior regarding 自己 and related words in these three languages.
참고문헌 (53)
- 김광희, "국어 재귀표현 구성의 범주 특성", 한국언어문학, 29, pp.377~400 (1991)
- 김연수, "접두어 ‘trans-’의 의미와 ‘탈경계 인문학(Trans-Humanities)’ 연구에 관한 소고", 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities, 3(3), pp.29~61 (2010), 이화인문과학원[DOI]
- 성광수, "국어 대명사에 대하여-인칭대명사의 소위 통칭과 재귀화에 대한 검토", 어문논총, 16, pp.101~118 (1975)
- 성광수, "국어 통칭대명사와 재귀대명사", 국어국문학, 86, pp.299~301 (1981)
- 성광수, "국어의 단어형성과 의미해석" (2001), 월인
- 손예철, "간명 갑골문 자전" (2017), 박이정
- 양만기, "甲骨文 “自”字 用法 考", 중국인문과학, 24, pp.1~28 (2002), 중국인문학회
- 이은수, "현대 중국어 재귀대명사'자기'에 대한 고찰", 석사, 중어중문학, pp.1999
- 이익섭, "국어의 단어형성과 의미해석" (1999), 학연사
- 이익섭, "한국어 문법" (2005), 서울대학교출판부
- 이정민, "언어학 사전" (1987), 박영사
- 장정임, "상고 한어 재귀사 自의 품사 및 탄생 과정- 통시적·언어 유형학적 고찰을 바탕으로", 중국언어연구, (97), pp.373~402 (2021), 한국중국언어학회[DOI]
- 조윤경, "접두어 ‘trans-’의 인문학적 함의 - 탈경계 인문학Trans-Humanities 연구를 위한 개념 고찰을 중심으로", 탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities, 3(3), pp.5~27 (2010), 이화인문과학원[DOI]
- 한국어 학습자의 오류 유형 조사 연구, "조철현", ~ (2002)
- 최현배, "우리말본" (1987), 연희전문학교 출판부
- 하영삼, "한자 어원 사전" (2018), 도서출판3
- 한송화, "재귀대명사 ‘자기’의 의미와 기능 연구 - ‘자기’와 ‘자신’의 말뭉치 용례를 중심으로 -", 외국어로서의 한국어교육, 38, pp.279~303 (2013), 언어연구교육원 한국어학당
- 程工, "漢語“自己” 一詞的代詞性", 現代外語, 3, pp.7~11 (1994)
- 程工, "生成語法對漢語“自己” 一詞的研究", 國外語言學, 1, pp.34~40 (1994)
- 程工, "從漢語“自己” 一詞的歷史性演變看新格賴斯主義語用照應理論", 解放軍外國語學院學報, (6), pp.10~15 (1994)
- 程工, "漢語“自己” 一詞的性質", 當代語言學, 2, pp.33~43 (1999)
- 董秀芳, "古汉语中的“自” 和“己” ── 现代汉语“自己” 的特殊性的来源", 古汉语研究, (1), pp.69~75 (2002)
- 黃六平, "漢語文言語法綱要" (1974), 中華書局
- 李計偉, "論反身代詞“身” 及符合形式反身代詞", 語文研究, 4, pp.25~28 (2012)
- 太田辰夫, "中國語歷史文法" (1987), 北京大學出版社
- 王力, "中國語法理論, 2 vols" (1987), 藍燈文化事業公司
- 魏培泉, "漢魏六朝稱代詞研究" (2004), 中央研究院語言學研究所
- 吳雲路, "中古漢語詞語例釋" (1992), 吉林教育出版社
- 許慎, "說文解字注" (1998), 上海古籍出版社
- 徐中舒, "甲骨文字典" (1988), 四川辭書出版社
- 楊伯峻, "古漢語語法及其發展" (2001), 語文出版社
- 姚振武, "上古漢語語法史" (2015), 上海古籍出版社
- 張萌穎, "漢語“自己” 研究綜述", 安徽文學, 2, pp.111~112 (2015)
- 張玉金, "西周漢語語法研究" (2004), 商務印書館
- 周法高, "中國古代語法(稱代編)" (1959), 商務印書館
- 朱冠明, "從中古佛典看“自己”的形成", 中國語文, 5, pp.402~411 (2007)
- 庵功雄, "新しい日本語学入門 ことばのしくみを考える" (2001), スリーエーネットワーク
- 風間伸太郎, "アルタイ諸言語と朝鮮語、日本語におけるいわゆる「再帰代名詞」の対照研究", 北方言語研究, 8, pp.23~58 (2018)
- 平田一朗, "徹底比較日本語文法と英文法" (2016), くろしお出版
- Faltz, Leonard, "Reflexivization : A Study in Universal Syntax" (2017), Routledge
- Frajzyngier, Zygmunt, "Reflexives: Forms and Functions, Typological Studies in Language 40" (2000), John Benjamins
- Haspelmath, Martin, "The World Atlas of Language Structure" (2005), Oxford University Press
- König, Ekkehard, "Intensifiers and reflexives:A typological perspective", pp.41~74 (2000)
- König, Ekkehard, "Intensifiers and reflexive pronouns", pp.194~197 (2005)
- Kuteva, Tania, "World Lexicon of Grammaticalization" (2019), Cambridge University Press
- Pulleyblank, E. G., "Outline of Classical Chinese Grammar" (1995), UBC Press
- Radford, Andrew, "Transformational Grammar : A First Course" (1988), Cambridge University Press
- Sohn, Ho-Min, "The Korean Language" (1999), Cambridge University Press
- Trask, R. L, "A Dictionary of Grammatical Terms in Linguistics" (1993), Routledge
- "日本国語大辞典"[URL]
- "코퍼스(말뭉치)", ~
- "Chinese Text Project"[URL]
- "일본국립국어연구소 일본어역사코퍼스 中納言"[URL]