국어 어미는 통사부의 단위이기 때문에 그것이 내부에 개재되어 단어는 통사적 구성으로부터 형성된 것으로 보는 견해가 제기되어 왔다. 단어가 통 사부에서 형성되는 기제로는 통사적 구성이 잦은 사용을 통하여 통시적으로 단어화되는 과정은 경험적으로 인정될 수 있지만 모든 단어가 그와 같은 기 제로 설명될 수는 없다. 또 통사적 구성이 공시적으로 핵이동이나 재분석에의하여 단어화되는 과정은 그 생산성이 지나치게 강한 점이 문제될 수 있다. ‘-은, -는, -을’, ‘-아/어, -고’ 등의 어미가 개재한 단어의 경우 어휘부에서의 공시적 단어 형성이 재고될 필요가 있다. 이들은 어휘부의 단위인 파생접사 가 결합한 예, 통사적 구성과 달리 시상적 의미가 관찰되지 않는 예 등을 통하여 여전히 어휘부 규칙의 존재를 보여 준다. 따라서 응하는 통사적 구성이 존재하는 단어라고 하여 항상 통사적 구성으로부터 도출할 수는 없 으며 어휘부의 규칙으로 형성될 가능성은 여전히 남는다.

The words involving endings are explained that they are formed at the syntactic component because they are syntactic units. It is certain that some words of the type are formed diachronically by frequent use, but all words cannot be explained by the mechanism. And the synchronic mechanism of head-movement or reanalysis is also problematic because of its excessive productivity. Add to this the motivation of the head movement(V-to-C) cannot be explained easily. If it is occurred for the purpose of making word, it may be not different to the word formation of the lexicon. So, it is necessary to reconsider the possibility that the words involving the endings ‘ -eun/-n, -neun, -eul/-l ’, ‘ -a/eo, -ko ’ are formed at the lexicon. There are some phenomena which show the possibility of the process of word formation. First, some words are combined with suffixes, the lexical units, such as ‘jeolm -eun-i, eori-n-dungi, me -l-kkun ’ etc. In the examples, ‘ -eun, -n, -l ’ are endings, and ‘ -ne, -dungi, -kkun ’ are suffixes. Second, the acceptable syntactic forms of ‘gyeondi-l-him, jwi-l-buchae, etc’ are ‘gyeondineun -him, jwineun -buchae, etc’, which are different from those of the words. So the words cannot be formed from the syntactic construction. Third, if the words involving endings are formed at the syntactic component, the endings should be keeping the meanings of inflection, i.e., tense or aspect. But the words ‘naneun -daramjwi, na-l-daramjwi’ do not keep the meaning of inflection, because they are synonyms although they involve the different endings ‘ -neun ’ and ‘ -i ’ of different meanings of inflection. These phenomena show the possibility of the existence of word formation rules of lexicon. So we can say that the words having the correspondent syntactic construction are not formed at the syntactic component at all times. Then, we must reply to the question ‘How can the endings introduced to the lexicon?’. The WFR of ‘XendingY→X+enging+Y’ can be understood as the grid of word, [X{ending}Y], and the endings are introduced at the lexicon by the gird.