부사절의 수식과 접속―종속 접속절과의 차이점을 중심으로―

김건희 한글학회 2012 한글 Vol.- No.297

본 연구의 목적은 부사절의 ‘수식, 접속’에 대해 종속 접속절과의 차이점을 중심으로 고찰하는 것이다. ‘내포’는 절이 한 문장의 성분으로 기능하는 방식이며 이러한 ‘내포’의 성분절인 부사절이 문장 성분으로 기능할 때 그 핵심적인 기능은 ‘수식’이므로 기존의 ‘내포와 접속’이 아닌 ‘수식과 접속’에 초점을 맞추어 고찰하였다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 먼저 ‘수식’의 정의와 문장 확장 구성에서 ‘수식’을 고찰하는 것에 대한 의의를 살펴보았다. 다음으로 부사절과 종속 접속절을 구분한 기존 논의에 대해 검토하고 동일한 어미 ‘-게’로 형성되는 부사절과 접속절을 의미적, 통사적 차이점을 중심으로 ‘수식’과 ‘접속’의 기제로 구별해 보았다. 또한 선행 연구에서도 고찰한 것처럼 ‘내포’의 관형사절, 명사절에도 ‘접속’의 기능이 나타나고 접속절도 내포되어 나타날 수 있는 것을 제시하여 ‘접속’과 ‘내포’는 상호 관련성이 있으며 ‘수식’의 부사적 기능은 다양한 문법 형태소와 관련되므로 이를 모두 부사형 어미로 볼 수 없음을 주장하였다. 즉 부사형 어미의 포괄적인 설정이 문법 형태소 본래의 기능을 고려하지 않은 지나치게 획일화된 문법 기술이 됨을 제시하였다. 이러한 일련의 논의를 통해 ‘수식’이 아닌 ‘접속’을 주된 기능으로 하는 종속 접속절은 의미, 통사적 측면에서 부사절과는 차이가 있음을 주장하였다. The aims of this study is to examine the modification and conjunction of the adverbial clause focused on the difference of the subordinate conjunctive clause. The transformational endings have the function of conjunction which has been considered as the exclusive function of conjunctive ending. Also the various grammatical morphemes can have the adverbial functions which is only one function of the adverbial ending, so these various grammatical morphemes must not be considered as adverbial ending. Consequently, subordinate conjunctive clause whose main function is conjunction, rather than modification must not be included in the adverbial clause which doesn't share the semantic and syntactic characteristics with the subordinate conjunctive clause.

문법 교육 항목으로서의 새로운 관형사절 도입에 대하여

홍윤기 이중언어학회 2010 이중언어학 Vol.42 No.-

Hong Yun Ki. 2010. 2. 28. A Study on Necessity of New Adnominal clause as Grammatical Items in Korean Language Education. Bilingual Research 42, 329-359. The aim of this study is to make clear the specific features of conjunctive adnominal clause, and to discuss the educational necessity of that as grammatical items in Korean language education. The conjunctive adnominal clause shows the event and the head noun of that notifies the cause or result of the event. The conjunctive adnominal clause showing relations of events between the preceding clause and the following clause has the unique features that we can not find in other adnominal clauses. Relations of events in conjunctive adnominal clause are the same to them in conjunctive expressions. The preceding clause and the following clause are arranged in order according to the occurring sequence of events in some conjunctive adnominal clauses, however they are in reverse order in others. The adnominal ending ‘-(으)ㄴ’ or ‘-(으)ㄹ’ depend on the occurring sequence of events of preceding clause and following clause. ‘-(으)ㄴ’ is selected in case that the event of preceding clause occurs before that of following clause. ‘-(으)ㄹ’ is used if the event of following clause occurs before that of preceding clause. These features of conjunctive adnominal clause consequently organize the unique sentences that other adnominal clauses can not make up. In addition, the adnominal endings are presented in the only beginners' stage in Korean language education, and also the conjunctive adnominal clause never be mentioned in Korean textbooks until now. For this reason, the adnominal clause showing the specific features should be set up as the grammatical items in Korean language education.(Kyung Hee University)

폴란드어 접속사 반복형태의 문법구성-한국어 어미 반복형태의 문법구성 비교를 통해-

Agnieszka, Szamborska 한국외국어대학교(글로벌캠퍼스) 동유럽발칸연구소 2013 동유럽발칸연구 Vol.36 No.-

Whilst studying the Korean language at the more advanced stage rather than at the beginner’s level, several complex sentence constructions are found which are interesting from both the semantic and syntactic point of view. These include ‘ending repetition forms’ for which Seo(2008) set up two conditions namely (1) in sentence constructions of three-clauses, identical endings of the same grammatical role are repeated between the first two clauses and before the last clause, (2) the meaning of the repeated ending shall be different from the meaning of the identical ending in a single form. In this way she showed easily understandable constructions appear in three-clause complex sentences which may be taught as an independent topic whilst teaching Korean as a foreign language. Based upon Seo(2008)’s research, the idea of finding similar constructions in the Polish language becomes apparent. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to clarify the patterns of Polish repetition forms and their meanings in comparison to those in the Korean language. The analysis focused upon examples of complex sentences from dictionaries and determining the repetition of conjunctions in the Polish language. Thus, after setting the group of the Polish conjunctive repetition forms with their role in connecting phrases and clauses in sentences, which is also similar to those endings found in the Korean language, and with reference to Seo(2008)’s conditions for grammatical constructions, patterns and meanings of the conjunctive repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Polish language are clarified. Then, based upon the meaning, one construction with identical meaning between phrases (although without a repetition of conjunctions) and four constructions with different (similar and opposite) meanings between clauses have been selected and compared with those in the Korean language. I. The Polish Conjunctive Repetition Forms as Grammatical Constructions to be compared with those in the Korean language. 1. identical meaning relation:① P i P(C)2. different (similar and opposite) meaning relation:① C₀, czy C₁, czy C₂② C₀, a to, że C₁, a to, że C₂③ (C₀) to C₁, to C₂④ (C₀) i C₁, i C₂A comparison of the repetition forms as grammatical constructions in both the Korean and Polish languages are presented in this paper. II. Differences between the repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Korean and Polish languages. 1. in Korean The ending repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Korean language are analysed at clause level and their meanings are very particular (nine meanings are analysed), which is also clearly shown in the number of such constructions (nineteen constructions are analysed). There is also consideration to identical, similar and opposite meanings in relation to between clauses. There is no conjunction ending in the Korean language which appears in repetition form and refers to negation on its own. 2) in Polish The conjunctive repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Polish language are analysed at the clause level, although some of them are realised at phrase level as well, which is characteristic of the spoken language. Their meanings are much more general (three main meanings) and their number is small (only four constructions amongst which there is one complex-conjunctive construction and one construction which appears only once in comparison to those in the Korean language). There is no additional consideration for identical, similar and opposite meanings between clauses. Constructions of identical meaning relationships are realised at phrase level and with only one conjunction (in other words there is no repetition of conjunction between phrases of identical meaning). The relationship of constructions with different meanings, despite their similar or opposite meaning, appears in all constructions. There is a conjunction ‘ani’ in the Polis... 한국어 능력 중급 이상 단계에서 복합 문형을 학습하는 것은 적절하면서도 의미·통사적으로 복잡하더라도 흥미로운 주제로 보인다. 서희정(2008)에서는 다음과 같은 조건 - 1) 어미 반복형태는 대등접속문이 상위문에 내포될 때 마지막 출현하는 대등적 연결어미가 내포문 어미와 같은 기능을 해야 함, 2) 어미 반복형태는 어미 단독형태와 다른 의미를 표출해야 함 - 을 달성하는 어미 반복형태 19가지를 선별하였고, 이를 문법구성으로 사용할 수 있음으로 한국어 교육시 독립적으로 가르치는데 가치가 있다고 제시하였다. 서희정(2008)의 어미 반복형태 구성은 본고의 바탕이 되며 폴란드어에서 대응하는 문법 현상이 나타나는지, 그렇다면 어떻게 표현되고 어느 정도로 사용되는지를 검토해 보고자 하는 것이 본고의 목적이다. 따라서 본고에서는 폴란드어 접속사를 통해 이루어진 접속사 반복형태 구성을 모색하였다. 폴란드어 접속사 반복구성은 동일 의미관계에서 존재하지 않는다. 한국어 동일 의미관계의 어미 반복형태 구성에 가장 유사한 폴란드어 예문은 단독적으로 나타나는 접속사를 통해 연결되는 동일형태 요소들의 반복구성이다. 반면, 한국어의 상이 의미관계의 어미 반복형태 구성에 대응하는 폴란드어의 접속사 반복형태 구성이 존재하며 이 중에 동일 접속사의 반복을 통해 연결되는 상이형태 요소들의 구성이 네 가지 항목으로 제시된다. 본고 분석의 결과대로 문법화가 된 한국어 반복구성은 폴란드 학습자들의 한국어 교육에 활용가치가 있다는 것을 증명해 본다. 한국어 어미 반복형태 구성에 유사한 폴란드어의 문법구성과 비교를 통해 한국어 구성의 특성이 더욱 부각된다. 또한 한국어와 비교를 통해 폴란드어의 접속사 반복형태 구성을 모색하고 정리함으로 두 언어에 관련된 연구에 도움이 되길 바란다.

폴란드어 접속사 반복형태의 문법구성

Agnieszka,Szamborska 한국외국어대학교 동유럽발칸연구소 2013 동유럽발칸연구 Vol.36 No.-

Whilst studying the Korean language at the more advanced stage rather than at the beginner's level, several complex sentence constructions are found which are interesting from both the semantic and syntactic point of view. These include 'ending repetition forms' for which Seo(2008) set up two conditions namely (1) in sentence constructions of three-clauses, identical endings of the same grammatical role are repeated between the first two clauses and before the last clause, (2) the meaning of the repeated ending shall be different from the meaning of the identical ending in a single form. In this way she showed easily understandable constructions appear in three-clause complex sentences which may be taught as an independent topic whilst teaching Korean as a foreign language. Based upon Seo(2008)'s research, the idea of finding similar constructions in the Polish language becomes apparent. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to clarify the patterns of Polish repetition forms and their meanings in comparison to those in the Korean language. The analysis focused upon examples of complex sentences from dictionaries and determining the repetition of conjunctions in the Polish language. Thus, after setting the group of the Polish conjunctive repetition forms with their role in connecting phrases and clauses in sentences, which is also similar to those endings found in the Korean language, and with reference to Seo(2008)'s conditions for grammatical constructions, patterns and meanings of the conjunctive repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Polish language are clarified. Then, based upon the meaning, one construction with identical meaning between phrases (although without a repetition of conjunctions) and four constructions with different (similar and opposite) meanings between clauses have been selected and compared with those in the Korean language. I. The Polish Conjunctive Repetition Forms as Grammatical Constructions to be compared with those in the Korean language. 1. identical meaning relation: ① P i P(C) 2. different (similar and opposite) meaning relation: ① Co, czy C₁, czy C₂ ② Co, a to, że C₁, a to, że C₂ ③ (Co) to C₁, to C₂ ④ (Co) i C₁, i C₂ A comparison of the repetition forms as grammatical constructions in both the Korean and Polish languages are presented in this paper. II. Differences between the repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Korean and Polish languages. 1. in Korean The ending repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Korean language are analysed at clause level and their meanings are very particular (nine meanings are analysed), which is also clearly shown in the number of such constructions (nineteen constructions are analysed). There is also consideration to identical, similar and opposite meanings in relation to between clauses. There is no conjunction ending in the Korean language which appears in repetition form and refers to negation on its own. 2) in Polish The conjunctive repetition forms as grammatical constructions in the Polish language are analysed at the clause level, although some of them are realised at phrase level as well, which is characteristic of the spoken language. Their meanings are much more general (three main meanings) and their number is small (only four constructions amongst which there is one complex-conjunctive construction and one construction which appears only once in comparison to those in the Korean language). There is no additional consideration for identical, similar and opposite meanings between clauses. Constructions of identical meaning relationships are realised at phrase level and with only one conjunction (in other words there is no repetition of conjunction between phrases of identical meaning). The relationship of constructions with different meanings, despite their similar or opposite meaning, appears in all constructions. There is a conjunction 'ani' in the Polis 한국어 능력 중급 이상 단계에서 복합 문형을 학습하는 것은 적절하면서도 의미ㆍ통사적으로 복잡하더라도 흥미로운 주제로 보인다. 서희정(2008)에서는 다음과 같은 조건 - 1) 어미 반복형태는 대등 접속문이 상위문에 내포될 때 마지막 출현하는 대등적 연결어미가 내포문 어미와 같은 기능을 해야 함, 2) 어미 반복형태는 어미 단독 형태와 다른 의미를 표출해야 함 - 을 달성하는 어미 반복형태 19가지를 선별하였고, 이를 문법구성으로 사용할 수 있음으로 한국어 교육시 독립적으로 가르치는데 가치가 있다고 제시하였다. 서희정(2008)의 어미 반복형태 구성은 본고의 바탕이 되며 폴란드어에서 대응하는 문법 현상이 나타나는지, 그렇다면 어떻게 표현되고 어느 정도로 사용되는지를 검토해 보고자 하는 것이 본고의 목적이다. 따라서 본고에서는 폴란드어 접속사를 통해 이루어진 접속사 반복형태 구성을 모색하였다. 폴란드어 접속사 반복구성은 동일 의미관계에서 존재하지 않는다. 한국어 동일 의미관계의 어미 반복형태 구성에 가장 유사한 폴란드어 예문은 단독적으로 나타나는 접속사를 통해 연결되는 동일 형태 요소들의 반복구성이다. 반면, 한국어의 상이 의미관계의 어미 반복형태 구성에 대응하는 폴란드어의 접속사 반복형태 구성이 존재하며 이 중에 동일 접속사의 반복을 통해 연결되는 상이형태 요소들의 구성이 네 가지 항목으로 제시된다. 본고 분석의 결과대로 문법화가 된 한국어 반복구성은 폴란드 학습자들의 한국어 교육에 활용가치가 있다는 것을 증명해 본다. 한국어 어미 반복형태 구성에 유사한 폴란드어의 문법구성과 비교를 통해 한국어 구성의 특성이 더욱 부각된다. 또한 한국어와 비교를 통해 폴란드어의 접속사 반복형태 구성을 모색하고 정리함으로 두 언어에 관련된 연구에 도움이 되길 바란다.

국어 문법 기술에 있어서 절의 문제

유현경 ( Hyun Kyung Yoo ) 한국문학언어학회(구 경북어문학회) 2015 어문론총 Vol.63 No.-

국어에서 절은 접속문과 내포문을 이루는 기본적인 문법 단위이면서도 그 자체의 특성이나 범위 등을 상세하게 고찰한 연구는 많지 않다. 이 연구는 국어의 문법 단위 중 절(節, Clause)의 정의와 특성을 살펴보고 복문에서의 절의 실체를 고찰하려 하는 것이 목적이다. 국어 문법 기술에서 절과 관련된 문제를 정리해 보면 다음과 같다. 첫째 절의 정의가 명확하지 않아서 생기는 문제가 있을 수 있다. 절을 문장에서 주술 관계를 가진, 더 큰 문장 속에 들어가 있는 것이라고 정의하면 주절이나 선행절, 후행절이라는 용어는 절의 정의와 불일치한다. 둘째, 특정한 절의 범위와 관련된 문제이다. 인용절이나 모문, 주절, 선행절, 후행절이 어디까지를 이르는 것인지가 불명확하다. 셋째 용어 사용의 일관성 문제이다. 절과 관련된 용어들은 습관적으로 사용되고 있지만 일관성이 결여되어 있어 문법 기술에 혼란을 불러일으킨다. 넷째 구, 문장 등 절과 관련된 문법 단위와의 문제를 들 수 있다. 본고는 이러한 문제를 중심으로 절의 정의, 범위 등에 대하여 고찰함으로써 국어 문법 단위로서의 절의 위상에 대하여 살펴보고자 한다. 국어에서 절은 문장과의 관계를 통하여 정의된다. 절은 주어와 서술어를 갖춘문장의 구성단위로 정의된다. 이에 비해 문장은 절 중 문말 수행 억양을 가지는 문법 단위이다. 본고에서는 이러한 정의를 기반으로 접속문과 내포문에서의 절의 범위를 다루었다. 접속문에서 선행절과 후행절을 이르는 범위, 그리고 내포문에서 내포절과 모절의 문제를 고찰하였다. 마지막으로 절과 유사하지만 절로 볼수 있는지 문제가 되는 몇 가지 예를 다루어 절의 외연을 한정하려고 하였다. 본고에서는 절의 규정을 명확하게 함으로써 복문의 문법 기술을 보다 명시적으로 할 수 있는 기반을 마련하였다. Although clause is a basic unit of Korean grammar which composes conjunctive or embedded sentence, little attention has been paid to its grammatical features or boundary in depth. In this regard, this present article attempts to examine the definition and characteristics of clause and consider the true nature of clause in complex sentences. Problems of clause in the description of Korean grammar are as follows. First, the definition of clause is blurred; clause is often defined as syntactic construction containing a subject and predicate and forming part of a sentence, however, this definition contradicts the concept of antecedent clause or following clause. Second, the limit of clause is unclear as this term is currently also used to refer to quoted clause, matrix sentence, principal sentence, antecedent clause, and following clause. Third, inconsistent use of clause-related terms leads to confusion when describing Korean grammar. Fourth, there are hierarchical contradictions among clause, phrase, and sentence. By focusing on these issues, this paper seeks to examine the status of clause as a unit of Korean grammar. In Korean grammar, clause is defined in relation to sentence: clause is a unit of a sentence containing a subject and predicate. Meanwhile, sentence is a unit that has sentence-final intonation. This article explores the boundary of clause according to these definitions and examines issues such as the boundary of antecedent and following clause in conjunctive sentences, and problem of embedded and matrix clause in embedding sentences. Lastly, this paper sets bound to the definition of clause by discussing a few cases which entail controversy in terms of their status as a clause. By clarifying the boundary of clause, this study provides a foundation of more consistent grammatical description of Korean complex sentences.

학교문법의 부사절 설정과 관련된 몇 문제

송정근 ( Jung Keun Song ) 성신여자대학교 인문과학연구소 2011 人文科學硏究 Vol.29 No.-

This paper argues that the explanation about the adverbial clause in school grammar has not systematic consistency caused by not considering the related other grammatical modules. As school grammar explained, If all the conjunctive ending which is the only way to make a conjunction in Korean is the adverbial ending which is a kind of embeded ending, every conjunction in Korean would be the subclass of embedding. It is not a proper nor a general recognition on the adverbial clause in Korean. Furthermore, such a view is not adopted in the classification of the extending of sentence. This paper also deals with the problems of the division of coordinate clause and subordinate clause in school grammar. In school grammar, even though coordinate clause and subordinate clause are distinguished, they are commonly included in the adverbial clause. It means that school grammar lacks of the enough grammatical proof to classify and establish the category of the adverbial clause. Though It is a difficult to separate coordinate clause from subordinate clause in Korean, it is not reasonable that these two clauses are treated as the same category.

접속 기능 우언적 구성의 특성에 대한 연구 - 접속어미와의 교체 여부를 중심으로 -

주향아,유현경 한말연구학회 2022 한말연구 Vol.63 No.6

In Korean, conjuctive ending is the typical grammar element that connects clauses. However, some periphrastic constructions work as conjunctive endings and reveal same meaning. This study focuses on the features of periphrastic constructions which have a conjunctional function considering the substitution of conjunctive ending. Based on Korean dictionaries and precedent researches, a list of periphrastic constructions with conjunctional function and conjunctive endings is shown and then investigated to verify whether all periphrastic constructions can replace with conjunctive ending or not. According to the investigation result, only some of periphrastic constructions can replace conjunctive endings. Periphrastic constructions which can replace conjunctive endings have distinctive properties as following. First, they appear detailed meanings of time and manner. Second, they restrict relation between antecedent clause and following clause. Third, they increase the independence of antecedent clause as contrasted with conjunctive ending. If periphrastic constructions can't change conjunctive endings, it is due to morphological and semantic reasons, which are including conjunctive ending inside but appearing more expanded meaning than that, expressing nonexistent meaning of conjunctive ending, and representing the specified meaning immediately and directly.

格助詞「を」と接続助詞的な「を」 -「の」節を中心に-

신의식 한국일본어문학회 2021 日本語文學 Vol.89 No.-

본고는 일본어의 ‘の’절에서 격조사 ‘を’와 접속조사적인 ‘を’에 대해 논의하고 있다. ‘の’절은 해석에 따라 절 내부가 ‘モノ’를 나타내기도 하고, ‘コト’를 나타내기도 한다. 본 고의 분석에서는 ‘の’절이 ‘モノ’를 나타내는 경우는 격조사 ‘を’가 절을 표시하고, ‘コト’를 나타내는 경우는 접속조사적인 ‘を’가 절을 표시하는 것을 살펴보았다. ‘の’절이 이른바 주요부내재관계절(Head Internal Relative Clause)을 표시하는 경우에는 그 내부에 주명사(Head)가 요구된다. 만약 ‘の’절 내부에 주명사가 없는 경우에 해당 절은 내재절 구문의 논항이 될 수 없다. 이와 같이 ‘の’절의 주명사가 존재하지 않는 경우는 지각동사구문의 보부이거나 접속조사적인 ‘を’가 표시하는 절이 된다. 지각동사구문의 보문과 접속조사적인 ‘を’가 표시하는 ‘の’절의 내부는 현상문으로 이루어져 있다. 따라서 접속조사적인 ‘を’가 표시하는 ‘の’에서는 지각동사의 생략이 추론될 수도 있다. 그러나 이러한 ‘を’에 후접하는 지각동사는 나타나지 않기 때문에, 접속조사적인 ‘を’는 격조사로는 기능하지 않는다. 결국 접속조사적인 ‘を’는 격조사의 기능과 특징이 희박화된 것으로 볼 수 있다. This Paper discusses the issues related to the case particle o and quasi-conjunctive particle o in Japanese no clauses. There are two interpretations that are mono(individual) and koto(event) in no clauses. When no clauses indicate mono, the case particle o will mark no clause. In other hand, when no clauses indicate koto, the case particle o or conjunctive particle o will mark no clause. In order to the no clauses indicate mono in Head Internal Relative Clause Constructions, the clauses will be required a head noun. If there is not a head noun in the no clauses, the clauses don't be a argument of matrix predication in HIRC Constructions. It is easy to become PVC or quasi-conjunctive particle o clauses, if there is not a head noun in the no clauses. Both PVC and quasi-conjunctive particle o clauses are Thetic sentences. Therefore, omission of perceptual verbs can be guessed with the quasi-conjunctive particle o clauses. The quasi-conjunctive particle o, however have not the function of case particle because there is not a perceptual verb following this o. This quasi-conjunctive particle o is the thing that the feature of case function has been reduced.

인용절에 대한 재고찰

김건희(Kim Keon-hee) 한글학회 2015 한글 Vol.- No.307

이 논문에서는 인용 구문을 이루는 핵심 요소인 ‘상위문 주어, 인용절주어, 보문자 ‘-고’, 상위문 인용동사’를 논제로 인용절을 명사절, 부사절, 종속 접속절과 비교하면서 ‘내포와 접속’의 관점에서 고찰하였다. 이를 토대로 인용절의 독자성을 밝혀 결과적으로 인용절을 내포절의 명사절, 부사절과 구분하고 접속절의 종속 접속절과도 구분하였다. 먼저 ‘인용절의 내포’에서는 인용절과 상위문의 조응으로 인용절이 다른 내포절인 명사절과 구분되는 것을 보였다. ‘인용절의 접속’에서는 인용 표지 ‘-고’와 인용동사의 생략을 논제로 언어유형론적 관점과 문법화 관점에서도 접근하여 동일하게 ‘-고’가 결합되지만 인용동사가 생략되어 종속 접속절과의 경계를 이루는 인용절과 아예 종속 접속의 새로운 기능을 획득한 종속 접속절을 구분하였다. 인용절과 부사절을 동일하게 보는 대표적인 근거인 ‘그렇게’ 대용형에 대해서도 다양한 구문 조건으로 살펴본 결과 ‘그렇게’가 전적으로 인용절을 대용하지 않는다는 것을 관찰하였다. 나아가 기존에 인용절의 의문 형식 대용형이라고 본 ‘뭐라고, 어떻게’의 경우도 각각 인용절과 부사절을 대용하여 인용절과 부사절이 구분되는 것을 알 수 있었다. The purpose of this study is to re-examine the quotative clause comparing with other embedding clause and conjunctive clause from the perspective of embedding and conjunction. In the embedding of quotative clause, the quotative clause is distinguished from the other embedding clause, nominative clause in the point of the control and raising of subject, which shows the ‘quotation-oriented’ according to the correspondence of the embedded clause. In the conjunction of quotative clause, the quotative clause is distinguished from the conjunctive clause as to the deletion of quotative marker ‘-고’ and quotative verb, especially the complementizer ‘-고’ as quotative marker which constitute the new complex sentences are examined. Also the quotative clause can not be exclusively substituted by the expression of ‘그렇게’, and the question referent, ‘뭐라고’ and ‘어떻게’ substitute the adverbial clause and quotative clause respectively.

유길준 문법에서 문법 단위와 문장의 종류

김인택 한국언어과학회 2011 언어과학 Vol.18 No.1

Daehanmunjeon(1908) consists of three grammatical unit system such as 'word-phrase-sentence'. The 'phrase' in this Daehanmunjeon(1908) refers to both a 'phrase' and a 'clause' in modern Korean grammar system. In this regard, the linguistic forms which are in the medium phase between a word and a sentence correspond to a 'phrase' in Daehanmunjeon(1908). There are three kinds of sentences--Danmun(단문), Bokmun(복문), and Yeon-gumun(연구문) in Daehanmunjeon(1908). Danmun is comprised of a 'subject' and a 'predicate' and Bokmun consists of two or more subjects and predicates. Yeongumun is comprised of a precedent clause and a following clause which are connected by a 'conjunctor'. It is hard to discriminate Yeongumun from Bokmun. The reason Deahnmunjeon(1908) only distinguishes between the simple sentence and the conjunction sentence in modern Korean grammar is mainly due to insufficient differentiation of grammatical units. However, the grammatical units of Daehanmunjeon(1909) are four unit system such as 'word-phrase-clause-sentence'. Daehanmunjeon(1909) systemically describes the types of sentences by establishing the different grammatical units, a 'phrase' and a 'clause'. There are three kinds of sentences-a simple sentence(Danmun), a complex sentence(Bokmun), and a duplex sentence(Jungmun) in Daehanmunjeon(1909). The simple sentence doesn't include the sentence having a 'clause' and the complex sentence includes the sentence involving additional clauses such as 'a nominal clause, an adjective clause or an adverbial clause'. The complex sentence corresponds to the matrix sentence which has a embedded sentence in modern Korean grammar. The duplex sentence which is applicant to the conjuncting complex sentence in modern Korean grammar involves an independent clause. The reason Daehanmunjeon(1909) could systemically describe the types of sentences is that it perceives the construction of a 'clause' and establishes a 'clause' as a distinct grammatical unit.