글로버메뉴 바로가기 본문 바로가기 하단메뉴 바로가기

논문검색은 역시 페이퍼서치


Journal of Chinese Linguistics in Korea

  • - 주제 : 어문학분야 > 중어중문학
  • - 성격 : 학술지
  • - 간기: 격월
  • - 국내 등재 : KCI 등재
  • - 해외 등재 : -
  • - ISSN : 1229-554x
  • - 간행물명 변경 사항 :
수록 범위 : 65권 0호 (2016)


김준수 ( Kim Jun Soo )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 1-31 ( 총 31 pages)
‘色’爲‘印(抑之初文)’之假借分化字, 楚文字或加疑聲。‘疑’屬於疑母, 其古聲母爲舌根鼻音, 鄭張尙芳(2003)將其上古音擬作*ŋш。‘色’從疑聲, 代表其上古聲母亦包含舌根鼻音成分, 因此本文將其上古音擬作*sŋrшg。‘印’後世作‘抑’, ‘抑’被用爲‘色’, 亦代表其上古聲母包含舌根鼻音成分, 因此本文將其上古音擬作*?ŋшg。‘抑’所從之‘?’爲‘印’之省體, ‘仰’、‘迎’、‘昻’等字亦從?聲, 其上古音分別爲*ŋaŋ?、*ŋaŋ、*ŋaːŋ, 聲母皆爲舌根鼻音, 此亦可證明‘色’之上古聲母包含舌根鼻音成分。 ‘印’後世被用爲璽印之印, 鄭張尙芳(2003;2013)、白一平與沙加爾(2014)皆認爲‘印(yin)’爲‘印(yi=抑)’之引伸用法。本文接受其構想, 便將‘印(yin)’之上古音擬作*?ŋiŋs。‘印(yin)’之上古音爲*?ŋiŋs, 在『詩經·大雅』與『詩經·小雅』裡‘抑’通假作‘懿(*?ŋrigs)’, 考慮到 此二點, 本文認爲在西周時期‘印(yi=抑)’之主要元音應當是i。據此本文將‘抑’之上古音擬作*?ŋig > *?ŋшg, 在*?ŋig階段從此引伸出*?ŋiŋs(印yin), 在*?ŋшg階段被假借爲*sŋrЩg(色)。

『국한문신옥편』의 자석(字釋)연구

나윤기 ( Na Yunki )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 33-58 ( 총 26 pages)
Gookhanmun-shinokpyeon which was published in 1908 holds a considerably important position in Korean dictionary history in terms of system and contents, as the first dictionary in Korean modern times. Especially, the systematic and comprehensive Hangeul definitions of Chinese character and Gookhanmun-shinokpyeon that is a character stroke-index method became a model for following dictionaries by providing a new direction of Korean dictionaries in modern times. This paper examined the historic transition rules and aspects of the Korean meaning of Chinese characters by comparing with HunMong-JaHoe which divides the ages, from a diachronic perspective and explored various characteristics including the semantic category of the Korean meaning of Chinese Characters in Gookhanmun-shinokpyeon, precise concretization tendency, semantic change-dependent replacement, dead language replacement and syllable change by comparing with the dictionaries of the same period synchronically in order to shed new light on the periodic meaning and function of the Korean meaning of Chinese Characters in Gookhanmun-shinokpyeon.

중국 방언의 통시적 비교와 『절운(切韻)』의 진실성

박혜리 ( Haeree Park )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 59-84 ( 총 26 pages)
As noted in the preface of the Qieyun (601 AD) compiled by Lu Ci, its phonological system is supposed to represent the zhengyin ‘standard pronunciation’ which Yan Zhitui and Lu Ci et al described and defined in circa 581. The idea of composite Middle Chinese is that this phonological system did not actually exist in any single variety of spoken Chinese at that time; rather, it was a composite of two or more regional norms, as well as of archaic pronunciations introduced to the text by copying in fanqie sound glosses from earlier sources. Forms of composite phonological systems or diasystems .which can also serve as historical reconstruction systems - have been used in Chinese historical phonology for pedagogical and theoretical purposes: for e.g., the prototypical eight-tone system for all modern Chinese dialects, Y. R. Chao`s General Chinese (1983) and Norman`s Common Dialectal Chinese (2006). But inventing a composite phonology to use it for a standard language is a completely different matter. It cannot possibly work as long as the following problems remain: one must define diaphones prioritizing some dialects over others, then resolve multiple correspondences and re-define distributional facts and syllable types, compromising differences in dialectal phonetic values of the selected diaphones; one must also deal with frequent irregular correspondences caused by borrowings and morphological variation. Such an artificial system could not be practiced widely, also because no one other than the compiler(s) could understand the intended sound values by the fanqie notations. But in fact, redactions of the Qieyun did follow up on the Qieyun system to further refine syllable distinctions and modify some individual word pronunciations while maintaining the same overall system; and this in itself is strong evidence that the Qieyun language existed and it was described by independent observers (박혜리 2015). Yan Zhitui et al. most likely contributed to the Qieyun phonology by working together with a comparative perspective based on their various dialect backgrounds, to precisely define the sound classes of their contemporary lingua franca.

≪주자어류고문해의(朱子語類考文解義)≫ ‘미상(未詳)’조 주석의 분포와 특징

강용중 ( Kang Yongjoong )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 85-107 ( 총 23 pages)
本文對朝鮮時期由李宜哲(1703-1778)注解的≪朱子語類考文解義≫進行了硏究。 主要方向爲硏究其中的“未詳”條注釋。作爲訓?學的術語“未詳”表示針對難以辯解的字音、字義或者詞組、句子以及篇章的意義姑且存疑或闕疑而以“未詳”做標記。這種方式可以說是體現古人的實事求是的學風。 在中國歷來使用著這個術語, 例如:段玉裁在≪說文解字注≫、朱熹在≪詩集傳≫都頻繁使用。與“未詳”同樣意義的還有“未聞”、“未審” 或 “闕”。按內容分類, 主要可以分成五大類:辨音、辨詞義、辨句意、辨篇章與經傳大意、辨名物禮制。 在≪朱子語類考文解義≫所反映的 與“未詳”同樣意義的有“未明, 未詳, 未曉, 未聞, 未見, 其詳未聞, 未能詳, 未能詳之, 未可曉”等等,非常地豊富。其之類型除了上述的五大類之外還有“表示上下文或整個語段幷沒有顯示和新信息的”。這一條?重要。因爲≪朱子語類≫作爲朱熹的語錄,由不同的門人記錄下來的,所以難免或遺漏或不精確的問題。在這一點上,朝鮮時期的語錄硏究者頂住了這個點子,一一地指出。這樣一來,≪朱子語類考文解義≫的“未詳”條注解具有旣豊富又多彩的特點。 這篇文章是爲了開啓往後的硏究而寫成的。譬如:對每一個“未詳”條進行考釋,把範圍再擴大進行其他訓?方式。本文希望這篇小文章能起到應有的作用。


김종찬 ( Kim Jong-chan )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 109-123 ( 총 15 pages)
≪Xiandai Hanyu Cidian ≫ is one of the most popular dictionaries among the Chinese. According to the dictionary, “bushan” is kind of double classification of words, i.e., adjective and verb. It also describe that the verb “bushan” is in a parallel relationship with the “bushanyu” I think that “bushanyu” is made of “bu”and “shanyu”, and there is no new meaning derived from them. So I argue that “bushanyu” is not a word, but a phrase. In Modern Chinese, when many adjectives and intransitive verbs are followed by the function word “yu”, many of them acquire the roles of transitive verbs by emitting “yu”. But the transitive verb “bushan” is quite different from them. In my opinion, “shan” originally has the function of a transitive verb, and “bushan” comes from combining the negative adverb “bu” and the transitive verb “shan”. So I would argue that “bushanyu” and “bushan” actually have a parallel relationship in meaning and structure.

‘고(?)’의 문법화 연구 - 형식동사와 대동사 용법을 중심으로 -

홍연옥 ( Hong Yeonok )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 125-142 ( 총 18 pages)
This research is to examine the meaning and syntactic character of “gao” and to establish the verbal category of “gao”. “gao” is able to adopt both nominal and verbal objects. When “gao” adopt nominal objects, its meanings expanded into various detailed meanings, as significations of “work in”, or “engage in” gradually disappeared with the effect of generalization and harmony principles of the grammaticalization mechanism. Expansion in meanings of “gao” was possible since emptying of meaning was accompanied by the process of grammaticalization. This is due to the fact when realizing grammatical functions that substitute something in the world of discourse shared by narrators and listeners, it is in general easy to utilize morphemes that contain almost no meaning. That is, “gao” became to possess the function of a pro-verb through the grammaticalization process. Meanwhile, it is not irrelevant with the historical backdrop that “gao”, containing the meaning of “engage in”, was combined with two-syllabled verbs. Verbs that conjoined with “gao” at the time were in most cases borrowed from Japanese or were newly-coined two-syllabled noun-verbs made by China. Consequentially, it became to take the form that resembles the structure of dummy verb. Nevertheless, “gao” cannot be considered as a dummy verb in that it simply takes a morphologically similar two-syllabled noun-verb, and does not correspond to the syntactic and pragmatic functions of dummy verb. Therefore, “gao” can be considered as a pro-verb when it takes both nominal and verbal objects, since it is introduced whenever it substitutes the meaning of a verb or when the narrator intentionally attempts to express ambiguously. This can be said to be the outcome of grammaticalization.

현대중국어 ‘A착(着)(O)VP’구조에 대한 의미론적 고찰

양영매 ( Yang Young-mae )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 143-173 ( 총 31 pages)
This study aims to factors which influences semantic selection of ‘A着(O)VP’ structure, semantic features of adjective and verbal phrases in the construction, semantic roles and relationships in the sentence through the semantic approach based on literatures. First of all, ‘A着(O)VP’ structure falls into three types by the relationship of ‘A着(O)’ and ‘VP’: connection, modifier, and predicate-object. Based on its type, its semantic role of ‘A着’ and ‘VP’ may differ. That is, in the first type, ‘A着’ plays a role of verbal head with ‘VP’, and can be used adverbial argument for ground as a modifier while ‘VP’, a verbal head. On the other hand, in the last type, ‘A着’ plays a role of a verbal head, whereas most of ‘VP’, verbal argument for objects. Next, adjectives in ‘A着(O)VP’ structure are generally monosyllabic nature adjectives with few two-syllabic state adjectives. Among them, ‘A着+VP’ formed adjectives without an object belong to formatives, states, and representatives, while the type ‘A着(O)+VP’ with an object includes color-adjectives, quantifiers besides above three categories (formatives, states, and representatives), even taste-adjectives. However, in ‘A着VP’ structure, there are dynamic verbs with semantic features of [+human description], [+controllability], but minor existential verbs with semantic features of [-human description], [-controllability], presenting existence, appearance and disappearance, and can dynamic verbs can be replaced. Finally, dynamics and passiveness of adjectives are major factors for determining three types of ‘A着 (O)VP’ structure, and non-changeability of forms, a characteristic of modern Chinese, is restrictive one for semantic selections.


채상여 ( Cai Xiangli )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 175-191 ( 총 17 pages)
本文針對現代漢語中判斷動詞"是"、焦点標記"是"和詞內成分"是"幷存的現象,從"是"是否發生詞匯化入手,重新分析了以往硏究中副詞"還是"的性質,認爲三種情況下的"還"、"是"共現不是副詞"還是",而是詞組:(1)"是"爲判斷動詞,做謂語中心語時;(2)"是"爲其后體詞的 焦点標記時;(3)焦点標記"是"和句末語氣詞"的"共現時。在此基礎上再次明確了副詞"還是"的 義項,幷認爲只有表類同義的"還是"和表延續義的"還"在動詞和形容詞之前存在替換可能性, 幷從語素"是"的"主觀肯定義"出發,辨析了"還是"與"還"用法上的具體差異。


사위국 ( Sa Wiguk )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 193-211 ( 총 19 pages)
The development and evolution from the Descriptive Structure to the Serial Verb Construction reflects the dynamic and developing of the Verb-Complement-Object Structure in Ancient Chinese period. The developing process contains the development of semantic relation, syntax structure and pragmatic function. From the semantic, each motion expressing the “action” and the “result” is respectively located in different clauses. The “action-result” semantic relation between V1 and V2 is very weak because of the influence from the form. But the motions expressing the “behavior” and the “result” in the Serial Verb Construction are located in the adjacent positions of the same clause, so the semantic relation is closer. From the syntax, the Descriptive Structure connects two clauses expressing the “action” and the “result” through the “action-result” semantic relation, two of the clauses are separated by a comma, and various of insert components can appear between the two clauses. The Serial Verb Construction is composed of “action” and “result” with relatively near syntactic position. If the object is considered, there will have three combination forms, V1V2O, V1O V2 and V1V2. From the pragmatic, the Descriptive Structure focuses on stating an event, the structural focuses are located in each clause. The Serial Verb Construction focuses on explaining the result, commonly the structural focus is V1, the expression focus is V2. The pragmatic development from the Descriptive Structure to the Serial Verb Construction embodies the order recombination of the new and old information, the changes of the expression focus etc.


김종호 ( Kim Jong Ho )
한국중국언어학회|중국언어연구  65권 0호, 2016 pp. 213-231 ( 총 19 pages)
본 연구는 생성문법 최소주의이론(Minimalist Program)의 각도에서 “언설동사(言說動詞) -‘말하다’라는 행위를 나타내는 동사 -”가 구성하는 문장구조와 그 변환형식의 통사적 특징과 교육의 중점사항에 대해 논한다. 본문의 내용을 요약하면 다음과 같다. 1. 각류의 언설동사가 선택할 수 있는 문장형식은 다음 표로 나타낼 수 있다. 2. 각류의 언설동사가 구성하는 각종 구조에서 “NP2” 의미역은 비교적 복잡하다. 고지류(告知類)의 경우는<수혜자(與事: dative)>혹은<도달점(目的: goal)>이 다 가능하나 질의류(詢問類)의 경우는<도달점>만 가능하다. 한편 호칭류(稱呼類)의 동사는 “NP2”와 직접관계가 없기 때문에 해당 명사구에 대해 의미역을 할당하지 못한다. 3. 각류 언설동사의 이중타동성 정도는 다음과 같이 표시할 수 있다. 고지류 >질의류 >호칭류 4. 각류의 언설동사가 선택적으로 취하는 문장 변환형식이 다르므로 교육적인 중점사항 역시 다르다. 그 중점 사항에 대해 해당 문장형식의 특징 및 성립하지 못하는 원인에 대한 설명 차원에서 제시하면 다음과 같다. 1) 고지류: 수여동사 구문과 달리 S3 형식이 성립하지 못하는 원인을 설명한다. 2) 질의류: S1, S3 형식이 성립하지 못하는 원인 및 한국어와의 대응관계를 중점적으로 설명한다. 3) 호칭류: 단지 S0 형식만이 성립하는 원인을 설명한다. 아울러 이 형식과 소위 겸어식(兼語句式) 구문과의 관계 및 이중목적어 구문과의 차이에 대해 설명한다.
1 2 >