‘고(?)’의 문법화 연구 - 형식동사와 대동사 용법을 중심으로 - = A Study on the Grammaticalization of “gao”: Based on the Analysis of Dummy Verb and Pro-verb

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

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.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Bybee, Joan L, "형태론:의미-형태의 관계에 대한 연구" 한국문화사 2000

2 박덕준, "형식동사의 의미론적 접근" 3 : 31-45, 1999

3 홍연옥, "형식동사의 의미기능 연구 : '有'를 중심으로" 서울대학교 대학원 2009

4 김선아, "현대 중국어의 대동사(pro-verb)에 관하여" 중국학연구회 (28) : 371-394, 2004

5 이성하, "문법화의 이해" 한신문화사 2006

6 Paul J. Hopper, "문법화" 한신문화사 1991

7 서정수, "동사‘하-’에 관한연구" 연세대학교 1975

8 손경옥, "동사 ‘搞’ 연구" 한국중국언어학회 15 : 2002

9 刁晏斌, "虚义动词论" 南开大学 2004

10 袁杰, "虚义动词纵横谈" (2) : 1984

11 朱德熙, "现代汉语语法研究" 北京商务印书馆 1980

12 中國科學院語言硏究所词典編輯室, "现代汉语词典" 商务出版社 1979

13 黄彩玉, "现代汉语泛义动词研究" 黑龙江大学 2003

14 吕叔湘, "现代汉语八百词" 商务出版社 1980

15 齐丽娟, "泛义动词研究综述”" (7) : 2007

16 李俊杰, "泛义动词“搞”的多角度研究" 延边大学 2012

17 范晓, "汉语动词概述" 上海教育出版社 1981

18 曾红霞, "对外汉语教学中“搞”的使用偏误及其教学对策" (1) : 2007

19 张春秀, "动词“搞”的句法、语义、语用分析" (3) : 2007

20 杨丽君, "动词“搞”在现代汉语中的语用考察" (12) : 2002

21 高永安, "做”, “作” 两个字的关系" (2) : 2001

22 李慧敏, "也谈“搞”" (6) : 2003

23 王展采, "“说“ 搞” 和“ 干”" (12) : 1995

24 徐时仪, "“搞”的释义探析" (4) : 2003

25 罗建军, "“搞”的词义扩张" (4) : 2007

26 范光林, "“搞”的指代性及语用分析" (6) : 2009

27 孙叶林, "“搞”的句法、语义和语用" (1) : 2004

28 孫慶玉, "‘有’는 형식동사인가?" 중국어문연구회 24 : 2003

29 Bybee, Joan L., "Morphology: a study of the relation between meaning and form" J. Benjamins 1985

30 Lakoff, "Metaphors We Live" University of Chicago Press 1980