설문 조사에 근거한 중국어 문장부호 "分號"의 어법 특성과 조사대상자 특성별 분석

박은석 ( Eun Sok Park ),유수경 ( Su Kyong Yu ) 한국중국언어학회 2015 중국언어연구 Vol.0 No.57

在現代漢語標點符號當中,分號是使用頻率較高的標點符號之一。不過因爲韓語裏沒有相應的標點符號,因此一般韓國學生흔難掌握好分號的功能。到目前爲止,關于標點符號的硏究大都知識從整體上對타們進行槪括性的分析,而對分號所進行的專題硏究却寥寥無幾。因此,我們採用問卷調査的方式,對學生對於分號功能的了解和使用情況進行了考察。根據調査結果,學生對於分號的功能的了解程度(旣正確率爲33.99%)遠低於逗號(66.35%)和冒號(71.18%)。我們按照複句結構的語義關係,把分號所出現的文章分爲“倂列”、“對比”、“選擇”、“轉折”、“因果”、“分合”這7種來興竝進行分析。結果顯示“倂列”和“對比”的分號使用正確率較高,約爲54%,“選擇”、“轉折”、“因果”、“分合”的正確率爲29~35%,“遞進”的正確率最低,僅爲24%。爲了了解個人情況對分號使用造成的影響,我們還對被調査對象的個人信息、學習漢語的經歷、居住中國的經驗和學習漢語標點符號的經歷等因素進行了調査。根據調査結果,被調査對象的班級水平、每天說漢語與否等因素對能否正確使用分號造成흔大的影響,學習漢語的時間也起到了一定的影響。此外,學習標點符號的經歷、是否參加過HSK考試、在那里兒(國內、國外或國內外)學習漢語等因素都不會造成太大的影響。綜上所述,能否正確使用分號,對分號功能的了解和文章結構的難度是最重要的兩大因素。分號除了熟悉的“平行倂列”結構複句(如本稿“倂列”、“對比”)以外,還出現在“非平行倂列”結構(“選擇”、“轉折”、“因果”、“遞進”)和“分合”結構複句中。“非平行倂列”上午正確率偏低的原因有兩個。第一,被調査對象對這種結構中所使用的分號功能了解不구;第二,“非平行平列”複句的結構和語義關係比“平行倂列”更複雜。此外,“分合”複句雖然結構本身難度不高,但因爲被調査對象對這種複句中的分號功能不太熟悉,因此也造成正確率較低。上述的分析結果顯示,對漢語標點符號進行敎育是十分必要的,特別是關於分號使用的敎育因爲“非平行倂列”和“分合”複句的正確率偏低,因此在對分號進行敎學的過程中,更要重點對這一方面進行講解敎學。

화용 기능의 ‘又’

박은석 ( Park¸ Eun Sok ) 한국중국학회 2021 중국학보 Vol.97 No.-

본 논문은 현대 중국어 ‘又’가 가지고 있는 화용적인 기능 즉, 어기 강화 기능과 담화 기능에 대하여 살펴보았다. 서술구 앞에 출현하는 ‘又’가 명제 의미를 표현하지 않고 ‘주제 승계 질문 강화’, ‘반문 강화’, ‘상반 강화’, ‘적절성조건 의미 부정 강화’ 등의 어기 강화 역할을 수행하는 경우가 있음을 밝히고 이러한 경우의 ‘又’는 어기 강화사로 볼 수 있다고 보았다. 그리고 현대 중국어에서 문미에 출현하는 ‘又’가 담화표지로서의 특성을 가지고 있음을 발견하고 문미 ‘又’의 담화표지적 기능이 ‘선행 발화 내용 강조’임을 밝혔다. 또한 더 나아가서 진술문에 출현하는 문미 ‘又’와 의문문에 출현하는 문미 ‘又’ 사이의 공통점과 차이점, ‘又’가 문미에 단독 출현한 환경에서의 문미 ‘又’와 ‘又’가 서술구 앞과 문미에 중복 출현한 환경에서의 문미 ‘又’의 공통점과 차이점에 대해서도 고찰하였다. This paper examines the pragmatic functions of modern Chinese ‘YOU’, namely, the intensifying function and the discourse function. In some cases, ‘YOU’, which appears before a predicate phrase, does not express the meaning of the proposition, but plays a role of intensifying modal meaning such as ‘reinforcement of topic succession question’, ‘reinforcement of rhetorical question’, ‘reinforcement of contradiction’, ‘reinforcement of negation of relevance condition’. And ‘YOU’ in this case can be regarded as a intensifier. Also, it was found that ‘YOU’, which appears in the sentence ending in modern Chinese, has the characteristic as a discourse marker, and it was revealed that the discourse marker function of the sentence ending ‘YOU’ is ‘emphasis on the contents of the preceding utterance’. Furthermore, the similarities and differences between the sentence ending ‘YOU’ appearing in the statement and the sentence ending ‘YOU’ appearing in the interrogative sentence were examined. And the similarities and differences between the sentence ending ‘YOU’ in the environment where the ‘YOU’ appeared alone in the sentence and the sentence ending ‘YOU’ in the environment where the ‘YOU’ is duplicated in the sentence were also examined.

한국어의 어휘 사동

박은석 ( Eun Sok Park ) 한국외국어대학교 언어연구소 2013 언어와 언어학 Vol.0 No.58

This paper analyzes lexical causatives in Korean. Lexical causatives in Korean consist of suppletive lexical causatives and identical lexical causatives. Suppletive lexical causatives in Korean consist of ``salhaehada`` and ``gireuda``, etc. verb sentences. Identical lexical causatives in Korean consist of ``heurida``, ``dallida``, ``umjigida``, ``geuchida`` and ``meomchuda``, etc. verb sentences. This paper analyzes and compares properties of these two types of Lexical Causatives, the implicativity, the kinds of causer, the intentionality of causer, the kinds of causee, the case of causee, the control of the causee, the predicates can be causativized and the direct/indirect causation. After analysing, This paper concludes that Korean suppletive causatives are more prototypical lexical causatives than Korean identical causatives.

`구별사`, `관형사`, `연체사` 비교 연구

박은석(PARK, EUN SOK) 한국중어중문학회 2015 中語中文學 Vol.61 No.-

This study examined and contrasted the properties of Chinese Qubieci, Korean Gwanhyengsa and Japanese Lentaisi. It also argued the independency in word class of Chinese Qubieci, Korean Gwanhyengsa and Japanese Lentaisi. The main function of Chinese Qubieci, Korean Gwanhyengsa and Japanese Lentaisi is to modify nouns, so they are modifiers. They can modify nouns without any modifying markers. Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa, and Lentaisi cannot be predicates alone, so they are different from verbs and adjectives. They cannot be subjects of objects, so they are different from nouns. Although their names are different, their main functions and properties are similar. So they can be considered as similar word classes. In meanings they can express, Gwanhyengsa is generally divided into Gwanhyengsa of expressing qualities or properties of nouns, Gwanhyengsa of expressing demonstrative functions, and Gwanhyengsa of expressing numbers. Lentaisi also can be divided into Lentaisi of expressing qualities or properties of nouns, Lentaisi of expressing demonstrative functions, and Lentaisi of expressing numbers. Qubieci only can express qualities or properties of nouns. So the types of meaning of Qubieci can express are smallest among Gwanhyengsa, Lentaisi and Qubieci. This study also examined the word order of related Gwanhyengsa, Lentaisi, and Qubieci in noun phrase, found that Chinese, Korean, and Japanese all have the word order of "demonstrative modifier→number modifier→quality/property modifier→noun". The result of this study can support the school grammar of Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa, and Lentaisi, which regards Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa, and Lentaisi as independent word classes. Since Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa, and Lentaisi can modify nouns without any modifying markers, they are different from adjectives. Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa and Lentaisi generally cannot be modified by degree adverbs, so they are different from adjectives. Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa and Lentaisi cannot be comparison contents of comparative sentences, so they are different from adjectives. Also Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa and Lentaisi generally cannot be duplicated, so they are different from adjectives. I concluded Qubieci, Gwanhyengsa and Lentaisi have sufficient qualifications for the independent member of word class.

중한 실의사동동사문 연구

박은석(Eun Sok Park) 중국문화연구학회 2011 중국문화연구 Vol.0 No.18

현대 중국어 ‘又’의 한국어 대응 양상 고찰 - 부사부터 담화표지까지

박은석 ( Park¸ Eun Sok ),심지영 ( Sim¸ Ji Young ) 경희대학교 글로벌인문학술원 2021 비교문화연구 Vol.64 No.-

본고는 현대 중국어 ‘又’의 한국어 대응 양상을 연구한다. 현대 중국어에서 ‘又’는 품사 면에서 일반적으로 부사로 분류되지만 일반적인 부사 역할 외에 강화사, 담화표지의 역할을 수행하는 것도 관찰된다. 본고는 현대 중국어 ‘又’가 명제적인 의미를 나타내는 일반적인 부사의 역할을 하는 경우 뿐 아니라 강화사 역할을 하는 경우와 담화표지 역할을 하는 경우의 한국어 대응 양상에 대하여서도 살펴보았다. This paper studies the Korean counterpart of ‘you’ in modern Chinese. In modern Chinese, ‘you’ is classified as an adverb in part of speech. In addition to its role as an adverb, it also performs a role as an intensifier and a discourse marker. This paper intends to examine the Korean counterpart in the case where modern Chinese ‘you’ acts as a general adverb expressing propositional meaning as well as when it acts as an intensifier and a discourse marker.

현대 중국어 사동문과 타동성

박은석 ( Eun Sok Park ) 서강대학교 언어정보연구소 2014 언어와 정보 사회 Vol.21 No.-

This paper analyzes Modern Mandarin Chinese causative sentence with transitivity. This paper agree with the view, which is transitivity is not just limited to verbs, but associated with the clause. And also agree with the other view, transitivity can have degrees. In Modern Mandarin Chinese, causative is one of the most representative transitivise mechanism. This paper mostly analyzes the causative sentences made from causativising adjective sentences and intransitive sentences. The elements influencing transitivity of Modern Mandarin Chinese causative sentences are implicativity, agency, affectedness, the properties of predicate, and the types of meaning. In causative sentences, if cause event implies effect event, the causative sentence assures the result. So transitivity of the causative sentence is stronger than the causative sentence which does not assure the result. The elements influencing agency of Modern Mandarin Chinese causative Sentence are animacy, volition, control, responsibility, and directness of causative relation. If the animacy, volition, control, responsibility, and directness of causative relation of the causative sentence have higher degrees, the transitivity of the causative sentence becomes stronger. In Modern Mandarin Chinese causatives, affectedness of causee can differ depending on the causee``s animacy and causee``s control of effect event. If the causee``s control of effect event is stronger, the affectedness of causee becomes weaker, as the result, the transitivity of the sentence is weaker. The transitivity of the causative sentence having the predicate expresses concrete, dynamic, perceptional, perfect and external action is stronger than the transitivity of the causative sentence having the predicate expresses internal, psychological action. And the transitivity is differ depending on the types of meaning of Modern Mandarin Chinese causative sentences. The transitivity of the ‘direct action’ meaning causative sentence is the strongest. The transitivity of the ‘cause’ meaning causative sentence is weaker than ‘direct action’ meaning causative sentence because of weak agency. The transitivity of the ‘order’ meaning causative sentence is weaker than ‘cause’ meaning causative sentence because of weak affectedness. The transitivity of the ‘permission’ meaning causative sentence is weaker than ‘order’ meaning causative sentence because of weak agency and weak affectedness. The transitivity of the ‘leaving with intention’ meaning causative sentence is weaker than ‘permission’ meaning causative sentence because of weak agency and weak affectedness. The transitivity of the ‘leaving without intention’ meaning causative sentence is weaker than ‘leaving with intention’ meaning causative sentence because of weak agency.

현대 중국어 부사 ‘又’의 의미 기능과 통사 기능

박은석 ( Park¸ Eun Sok ) 한국중국어문학회 2021 中國文學 Vol.108 No.-

This paper studied the semantic and syntactic functions of the modern Chinese adverb ‘YOU’. The original meaning and basic meaning of the adverb ‘YOU’ is ‘addition’, and the meaning of ‘time order’, ‘repeat’, ‘continue’, ‘intensify’, ‘return’ of ‘YOU’ is based on the meaning of ‘addition’. And It was revealed that ‘subject/topic’, ‘whether the predicate phrase is the same’, ‘type of predicate phrase’, and ‘temporality’ are factors involved in the formation of the meaning of the adverb ‘YOU’ and the difference between the meanings. In addition, ‘YOU’ can function as a connecting adverb that connects words, phrases, clauses, sentences, and paragraphs. And, although the word order of the adverb ‘YOU’ is always in front of the predicate, the word order of the auxiliary verb and the adverb ‘YOU’ and the word order of the negative and the adverb ‘YOU’ may vary depending on the meaning range encompassed by ‘YOU’.

중국 지역 내 중국-티베트 언어의 소유구성 연구

박성하 ( Park Seong Ha ),박은석 ( Park Eun Sok ),유현조 ( You Hyun Jo ) 한국중국학회 2017 중국학보 Vol.82 No.-

본 논문은 중국 지역 내 중국-티베트 언어 중 소수민족 언어 16개와 표준중국어를 대상으로 소유구성을 나타내는 방식에 대해 정리하고 분석하여 그 특성을 귀납한 연구이다. 소유구성을 나타내는 방식을 크게 어순과 문법표지를 기준으로 살펴보았는데 어순 면에서 볼 때 티베트-버마어족에 속하는 언어들은 모두 소유자가 앞에 피소유자가 뒤에 오는 GH 어순을 가지고 있음을 알 수 있었다. 타이-카다이어족에서는 ‘차동어’를 제외한 나머지 언어들은 HG 어순과 GH 어순이 모두 가능함을 알 수 있었다. 몽-몐어족에 속하는 ‘호네어’는 GH 어순만 가능함을 알 수 있었다. 문법표지는 소유자 표지와 피소유자 표지로 나누어 살펴보았는데, 피소유자 표지를 사용하는 언어는 ‘갸롱어’, ‘터룽어’, ‘리수어’ 3개뿐이고, 소유자 표지를 사용하는 언어가 대다수임을 알 수 있었다. 그리고 대부분의 언어에서 소유자가 명사인지 대명사인지에 따라 문법 표현 방식이 다르게 나타나는 경향이 있음을 알 수 있었다. 이 문법표지들은 언어에 따라 필수적인 경우도 있고, 수의적인 경우도 있고, 조건에 따라 필수적으로 사용해야 하거나 생략 가능한 경우도 있었다. 그리고 소유자와 피소유자의 의미관계인 ‘수(단수, 복수)’, ‘친족명칭’, ‘신체기관’, ‘양도불가능’에 따라서 문법표지의 종류, 필수성, 수의성 등이 달라지기도 함을 알 수 있었다. 그리고 본 연구를 통해 소유자와 피소유자 간 어순과 어순의 고정성, 문법표지 간 관계를 발견할 수 있었다. 즉, GH 어순을 가진 언어들은 어순이 고정적인 반면에 HG 어순을 가진 언어들은 문법표지를 가질 경우 GH 어순도 가능함을 알 수 있었다. 또한 고정적인 GH 어순을 가진 언어들의 경우 문법표지가 필수인 언어들도 있고, 조건에 따라 생략가능하거나 또는 조건에 따라 필수인 경우도 존재했다. 그리고 이는 소유자와 피소유자의 의미 관계에 따라 좌우되는 경우가 많았다. HG 어순을 우세어순으로 가지는 언어들의 경우 소유구성을 나타내는 문법표지가 있기는 하나 필수적이지 않음을 알 수 있었다. 즉, 본 연구를 통해 살펴 본 중국-티베트 언어들은 소유구성을 나타내는 문법표지와 어순 사이에는 상당한 관련성을 가지고 있음을 알 수 있었다. In this article we investigate major typological features related to the word order and the marking in the possessive constructions of the Chinese and 16 Sino-Tibetan minority languages in China, including 9 Tibeto-Burman, 6 Tai-Kadai (or Kam-Tai) and one Hmong-Mien (or Miao-Yao) languages. A possessive construction is sometimes called as a genitive construction and consists of a possessor (or genitive noun) and a possessee (or head noun). The order in Tibeto-Burman languages is GenHead. Both GenHead and HeadGen orders are found in Tai-Kadai languages except the Chadong language. The order in the Chadong is GenHead. The order is HeadGen in the Ho Ne, the sole Hmong-Mien language studied in this article. All target languages have obligatory or optional explicit morphosyntactic marking within possessive constructions. Head (possessee) marking is observed only in Gyalrong, Drung and Lisu languages. Dependent (possessor) marking is observed in all languages. Possessor nouns are marked by particles and pronominal possessors are marked by phonological or morphological changes. In some languages, possessor nouns are not marked but only pronominals are marked. In other languages, possessor nouns are makred but the marking is optional or different for the inalienable possession, blood relations, body parts, or singular possessors. Finally, we found the correlation between the marking and the word order within possessive constructions. In Lingao, Cun, Chadong, Gelao, Buyang, Bouyei languages, HeadGen is the default order without any marking and infrequent GenHead order is possible with possessor marking particles which are probably borrowed from the Chinese language. In the other languages, the order is GenHead with obligatory or optional marking.

‘幾’는 의문대사인가? 수사인가?

고영란(Ko, Young-Ran),박은석(Park, Eun-Sok) 중국문화연구학회 2020 중국문화연구 Vol.0 No.50

Throughout the Chinese academia, 幾(jǐ)’s word-class has been recognized as a numeral or an interrogative pronoun, and some scholars view it as both a numeral and an interrogative pronoun both. However, no valid rationale for defining 幾(jǐ)’s word-class as such has been presented. We reviewed the situation of 幾(jǐ)’s word-class notation extensively through Chinese dictionaries, Chinese grammar books, and beginner’s Chinese textbooks and considered the use of ‘幾(jǐ)’ from a historical and synchronic perspective. In this way, we concluded that ‘幾(jǐ)’ is a concurrent word. In addition, we prepared grounds for claiming ‘幾(jǐ)’ as a concurrent word, and also uncovered about the relationships between the meanings of the numerals ‘幾(jǐ)’, the relationship between the meanings of ‘幾(jǐ)’, and the word-class of ‘幾(jǐ)’ and the relationship between the numerals ‘幾(jǐ)’ and the interrogative pronouns ‘幾(jǐ)’ for the first time. ‘幾(jǐ)’ belongs to the word-class of numeral in terms of the distribution, but the reasons that it should also be recognized as an interrogative pronoun are as follows. First, if ‘幾(jǐ)’ is used in an interrogative sentence, it shows a multifunctional aspect related to the interrogative such as question, answer, and substitution. Second, ‘幾(jǐ)’ is not only used as an interrogative usage, but also used as a non-interrogative usage such as arbitrary reference and empty reference. This shows the same pattern as the development of other interrogative pronouns. Third, ‘幾(jǐ)’ has been frequently used in the context of interrogative since Archaic Chinese, so it eventually has become closer to an interrogative pronoun through interrogative “absorption of context meaning”.