현대 중국어 준접사 파생 구문 연구

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This dissertation is grounded in the research paradigm of cognitive linguistics. From the perspective of construction, and within the theoretical frameworks of Constructionalization and Constructional Change, as well as Construction Morphology, it integrates Grammaticalization theory to analyze quasi-affixes in Modern Chinese and their derivational constructions.
This dissertation designates the constructions formed by quasi-affixes as quasi-affixal derivational constructions. The overall meaning of such constructions cannot be obtained through the linear accumulation of the semantics of their internal components, which aligns with the fundamental characteristics of a construction. The specific derivatives formed by quasi-affixes may be regarded as concrete constructions, while from multiple such concrete constructions, higher-level constructions such as “quasi-prefix X” or “X quasi-suffix” can be further abstracted. The main conclusions of this dissertation are as follows.
From the perspective of Constructionalization and Constructional Change, and adopting a diachronic perspective, the formation of quasi-affixal derivational constructions in Modern Chinese can be broadly divided into three developmental paths.
The first is the path of general Constructionalization, namely the development of new constructions out of pre-existing ones in Modern Chinese. In this process, components originally functioning as free morphemes undergo Bleaching and positional fixation within Chinese, gradually evolving into quasi-affixes, which then combine with “X” elements to form new types of constructions. In this way, compound-word constructions are transformed into quasi-affixal derivational constructions, as seen in the formation of the “fan-X (泛X)” construction and the “X-mang (X盲)” construction.
The second is the path of newly emerged Constructionalization, which is closely related to language contact. When external expressions (including foreign languages, dialects, or professional jargon) enter Modern Mandarin, pre-existing lexical morphemes in Mandarin undergo Grammaticalization, evolving into quasi-affixes that combine with “X” elements to form new constructions. This process may be viewed as the absorption and reconfiguration of external concepts into Chinese. The semantics of such quasi-affixes are no longer directly connected with the semantics of their original compound constructions, thus representing a pathway where entirely new constructions arise independently of pre-existing ones, such as in the formation of the “yun-X (云X)” construction and the “X-kong (X控)” construction.
The third path involves semantic Constructional Change, namely an internal evolutionary route in which existing forms are preserved while meanings expand or shift. This does not imply the absence of Constructionalization; rather, in Early Modern Chinese, Constructionalization was achieved through a series of lexemes based on holistic metaphor, while in Modern Chinese, semantic extension has become the central mechanism by which quasi-affixal derivational constructions are stabilized. Representative cases include the establishment of the “ruan-X (软X)” construction and the “X-gou (X狗)” construction.
The diachronic evolution of quasi-affixal derivational constructions in Chinese can thus be explained through these three developmental paths. However, it should be emphasized that Constructionalization and Constructional Change are not mutually exclusive concepts; the development of quasi-affixal constructions is inevitably the result of the combined effect of both.
From the perspective of Construction Morphology, and adopting a synchronic perspective, each abstract type of quasi-affixal derivational construction is a higher-level form-meaning pair abstracted from a set of concrete derivatives, which can be broadly categorized into two formal types: the “quasi-prefix X” construction and the “X quasi-suffix” construction. Specifically, under each abstract form-meaning pair, multiple lower-level constructions may further emerge due to semantic differentiation, forming a hierarchical system with inheritance relations. That is, based on the semantic type of the “X” element, intermediate and lower-level constructions can be derived under the abstract schema, down to the level of individual words.
Such a hierarchical system of constructions can directly represent the form-meaning pair of the higher-level construction and possible paths of semantic differentiation, as well as the more productive directions of word formation, demonstrating the feasibility of describing quasi-affixal derivational words in Modern Chinese from a construction-based perspective.
In terms of the interaction between form and meaning, in the “quasi-prefix X” construction, the semantic features of the quasi-affix tend to show generalization, meaning that multiple semantic variants may arise depending on different base words, and sometimes even different senses. Examples include the “fan-X (泛X)” construction, “yun-X (云X)” construction, and “ruan-X (软X)” construction, where the semantics of the quasi-affix is strongly influenced by the “X” element.
By contrast, in the “X quasi-suffix” construction, the semantic features of the quasi-affix tend to show categorization, meaning that a series of derivatives sharing the same quasi-affix share a common semantic core. Within the inheritance hierarchy, semantic analysis can reveal semantic variants or smaller, more specific semantic units, but typically does not lead to multiple distinct senses. Representative examples include the “X-mang (X盲)” construction, “X-kong (X控)” construction, and “X-gou (X狗)” construction.
In Modern Chinese, word formation is primarily dominated by compounding, with derivation playing a secondary role. However, it is undeniable that the status of derivational word formation is gradually rising, as reflected in the continuous growth in the number of quasi-affixes and their derived words. Therefore, the study of Chinese word formation inevitably involves an investigation of quasi-affixes.
This dissertation is grounded in the realities of the Chinese language and adopts a new theoretical research paradigm to conduct a comprehensive examination of quasi-affixes and their derived words, aiming to provide a novel perspective on the phenomenon of quasi-affixes and to address existing gaps in current research.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

本文基于认知语言学的研究范式，从构式的视角切入。在构式化与构式演变理论以及构式形态学理论的框架下，结合语法化理论，将由类词缀构成的构式定义为“类词缀派生构式”。本文以六个代表性个案为研究对象，从历时的生成与演变以及共时的形义对应及承继关系两个方面展开分析。以下为本文的主要结论。
基于构式化与构式演变理论，从历时的角度看，现代汉语类词缀派生构式的形成大致可分为三类路径。其一为“一般构式化”路径，即在现代汉语中从原有构式发展出新构式的路径。在此过程中，原本作为自由语素的成分在汉语内部经历语义虚化与语法位置固定化，逐渐演化为类词缀，并与“X”成分结合形成新的构式类型，由此从本身的复合词构式变为类词缀派生构式，如“泛X”构式和“X盲”构式的形成。其二为“新生构式化”路径，该路径与语言接触相关。外来表达（主要包括外语、方言或行业语等）进入现代汉语普通话后，普通话中原有的实语素经历语法化演变为类词缀，并与“X”成分结合形成新构式。这可视为汉语对外来概念进行吸收与重构的结果，其类词缀语义已和原本复合词构式的语义无直接联系，是不基于原有构式而出现新构式的路径，如“云X”构式和“X控”构式的形成。其三为意义上的“构式演变”路径，即现代汉语中基于已有形式，而意义发生扩大或转移的内部演变路径。该路径并非未发生构式化，而是至少在近代汉语中，构式化已通过一系列基于整体隐喻的词汇实现，至现代汉语阶段，以意义扩展为核心的构式演变成为类词缀派生构式得以稳固的主要原因，如“软X”构式和“X狗”构式的形成。汉语类词缀派生构式的历时演变均可由上述三种路径予以解释。但需要注意，构式化与构式演变并不是互相排斥的概念，类词缀构式的发展也一定是二者共同作用的结果。构式化与构式演变理论为分析汉语类词缀的生成及其派生词的产出与发展提供了新的视角与理论框架。
基于构式形态学理论，从共时的角度看，每一类抽象的类词缀派生构式都是从一定数量的实体派生词中抽象得出的上位“形式—意义对”，大体可分为“类前缀X”构式和“X类后缀”构式两大形式类型。具体而言，每一个抽象的“形式—意义对”之下，又可进一步析出因语义分化而形成的多个下位构式，从而构成一个具有承继关系的层级系统。即，在抽象图式之下依据“X”成分的意义类型归纳出中间层级构式与下位构式，直至分析到实际的单词。这样的构式层级系统可以直观呈现上位构式的形义配对情况以及可能出现的意义分化路径，以及其中更具能产性的生成方向。基于上面的分析，从形式和意义的互动关系上看，“类前缀X”构式中，类词缀在构式中的意义特征容易表现为“泛化”，即可能根据不同的词基而出现多个语义变体，甚至是不同义项，其类词缀语义受“X”成分的影响大，如“泛X”构式、“云X”构式和“软X”构式。而“X类后缀”构式中，类词缀在构式中的意义特征容易表现为“类化”，即共享一个类词缀的一系列派生词具有某种共同的意义，在承继关系上可以通过语义分析到语义变体或是更小、更具体的语义上，而一般不会出现发展出多个义项的情况，如“X盲”构式、“X控”构式和“X狗”构式。构式形态学为共时类词缀派生词的形义描写提供了理论依据，其特点在于不局限于传统的静态分类，而是强调形式与意义的动态互动。
现代汉语构词法以复合为主，派生为辅.但不可否认，派生构词的地位正在逐渐上升，可以表现为汉语类词缀及其派生词数量的持续增长。因此，汉语构词研究必然涉及对类词缀的探讨。本文立足汉语事实，以新理论研究范式为基础，对类词缀及其派生词进行综合考察，旨在从新的角度解释类词缀现象，以弥补当前研究的不足。

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 1
• 1.1 연구 목적 1
• 1.2 선행 연구 5
• 1.3 연구 대상 11
• 1.4 연구 방법 및 내용 14
• 제2장 준접사 연구 현황 고찰 18
• 2.1 연구 시기 18
• 2.1.1 연구 초기 18
• 2.1.2 연구 발전기 22
• 2.1.3 연구 성숙기 29
• 2.2 연구 주제 31
• 2.3 연구 지역 37
• 2.3.1 한국 38
• 2.3.2 대만 42
• 2.3.3 일본 44
• 2.3.4 영어권 46
• 제3장 구문론과 문법화 이론 고찰 49
• 3.1 구문론 49
• 3.1.1 구문 49
• 3.1.1.1 구문의 구성 53
• 3.1.1.2 구문의 유형 58
• 3.1.2 구문화와 구문변화 60
• 3.1.2.1 구문화 61
• 3.1.2.2 구문 변화 63
• 3.1.3 구문형태론 66
• 3.1.3.1 구문 도식의 개념 69
• 3.1.3.2 구문 도식의 특징 71
• 3.2 문법화 이론 75
• 3.2.1 문법화 개념 76
• 3.2.2 문법화의 기제 80
• 3.2.2.1 은유와 환유 81
• 3.2.2.2 재분석과 유추 84
• 3.2.2.3 문법 복제 86
• 3.2.3 문법화의 동인 86
• 3.2.3.1 효율성 동인 87
• 3.2.3.2 창의성 동인 88
• 3.2.3.3 상호작용성 동인 88
• 3.2.3.4 접촉성 동인 89
• 3.2.4 문법화의 특징 90
• 제4장 준접사 파생 구문의 생성 및 발전 95
• 4.1 구문의 형성 경로 95
• 4.1.1 일반 구문화 95
• 4.1.2 신생 구문화 97
• 4.1.3 구문 변화 98
• 4.2 사례 분석 99
• 4.2.1 일반 구문화 경로 100
• 4.2.1.1 ‘泛X’ 100
• 4.2.1.2 ‘X盲’ 106
• 4.2.2 신생 구문화 경로 111
• 4.2.2.1 ‘云X’ 112
• 4.2.2.2 ‘X控’ 117
• 4.2.3 구문 변화 경로 121
• 4.2.3.1 ‘软X’ 122
• 4.2.3.2 ‘X狗’ 128
• 4.3 소결 135
• 제5장 준접사 파생 구문의 형식과 의미 138
• 5.1 구문의 형식과 의미 138
• 5.1.1 구문 강요 138
• 5.1.1.1 준접사의 문법화 실현 139
• 5.1.1.2 ‘X’ 성분의 변화 142
• 5.1.2 형식과 의미 짝 도출 144
• 5.1.3 의미 분화와 상속 계층 관계 149
• 5.2 사례 분석 152
• 5.2.1 준접두형 구문 152
• 5.2.1.1 ‘泛X’ 152
• 5.2.1.2 ‘云X’ 157
• 5.2.1.3 ‘软X’ 163
• 5.2.2 준접미형 구문 169
• 5.2.2.1 ‘X盲’ 169
• 5.2.2.2 ‘X控’ 173
• 5.2.2.3 ‘X狗’ 179
• 5.3 소결 184
• 제6장 결론 188
• 참고문헌 193
• <부록 1> 준접사 목록 통합표 208
• <부록 2> 파생어 목록 214
• <부록 3> 용어 대조표 219
• 中文摘要 222
• Abstract 225