국내 중국어 문법서 연구 ― 문법용어 및 구성체계 비교를 중심으로

서지은 ( Suh¸ Jieun ),박창수 ( Park¸ Changsoo ),최재영 ( Choi¸ Jaeyoung ) 한국중국언어학회 2021 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.96

本文以16种汉语语法书为研究对象, 对语法术语的标准化问题进行了讨论, 并在语法术语和结构体系两个层面上进行了比较研究。主要结论如下: 第一, 在韩国出版的语法书中, 有一些语法书把介词、助动词、宾语、定语、状语和体分别称为“개사”、“능원동사”、“빈어”、“한정어”、“상황어”、“동태”, 它们都是借用汉字音的名称, 而在韩语中表示这些概念的名称都已存在, 如“전치사”、“조동사”、“목적어”、“관형어”、“부사어”、“상”等, 因此前一类的汉字音名称都是不必使用的。 第二, 有一些语法书把“代词”和“拟声词”分别称为“대명사”和“의성어”, 不过“代词”和“대명사”并非等同的概念, 而“의성어”这一名称容易误解为句子成分的一类。我们认为, 比这些名称更合适的是“대체사”和“의성사”。 第三, 特殊句式“X”字句 (如“把字句”) 共有两种韩语名称, 一种是“‘X’구문”, 另一种是“‘X’자문”。在构式语法里, 构式(即“구문”)指的是“形式语义匹配”, 因此如果用“‘X’구문”来指称“X”字句, 则会更好体现特殊句式本身的性质。此外, 一些语法书把“把”字句和被动句分别称为“처치문”和“‘被’구문”, 但“처치문”这一名称很难体现“把”字句的语义功能, “‘被’구문”是被动句的下位概念, 因此用这两个术语来指称“把”字句和被动句都是不合理的。 第四, 本文研究的16种汉语语法书根据结构体系可以分为A、B两类:A类以汉语语法体系为主 (10种), B类则以个别的表达方式为主 (6种)。另外, 大多数A类书都涉及几乎所有的基本语法项目, 而B类语法书仅涉及基本语法项目的一部分。据此而言, A类书更适合于想比较全面地学习汉语语法体系的学习者;B类书更适合于想根据各种情况能够说出基本语义表达的学习者。 第五, A、B类语法书在目录的编排上也有差异。A类语法书的排列顺序一般都是“先词类后句子”式, 而B类语法书的排列顺序既有“先句子后词类”式, 也有词类和句子的混合式。“先词类后句子”式和“先句子后词类”式各有好处, 前者是从汉语语法的基本单位开始的, 因此它能够让学习者逐步了解汉语语法体系的全貌, 而后者能够让学习者从学习的起步阶段开始就会表达出汉语的基本句式来。 This paper discusses the ways to standardize the grammatical terms and examines the current 16 Chinese grammar books in Korea by comparing their grammatical terms and structural systems. It has come to the following conclusions: First, Some of the grammar books still use Chinese consonants even though there are alternative terms in Korean, such as ‘개사’, ‘능원동사’, ‘빈어’, ‘한정어’, ‘상황어’, ‘동태’. It is preferable to change their names to ‘전치사’, ‘조동사’, ‘목적어’, ‘관형어’, ‘부사어’, ‘상’, respectively. Second, Some grammar books use the terms ‘대명사’ and ‘의성어’ to refer to ‘代词’ and ‘拟声词’. ‘대명사’ is not equivalent to ‘代词’, and ‘의성어’ is easy to be misunderstood as a type of sentence component, so these terms should be replaced by ‘대체사’ and ‘의성사’ respectively. Third, the special sentence construction made on behalf of one or more of the letters (‘X’) are named differently as ‘ ‘X’구문’ or ‘ ‘X’자문’ in each grammar book. Given that the construction represents a particular pair of forms and meanings, the term ‘ ‘X’구문’ is more consistent with the special sentence construction. Some grammar books use the names ‘처치문’ and ‘ ‘被’구문’ to refer to 把-construction and passive construction, but ‘처치문’ does not clearly reflect the function of 把-construction and ‘ ‘被’구문’ is a subconcept of the passive construction, so they are not all appropriate terms. Fourth, the structures of 16 grammar books can be divided into two types. type A is based on the grammar system of Chinese, and type B is based on the expression of grammar items. The books of type A cover almost all basic grammar items, whereas the books of type B cover only a part of the basic grammar items. Therefore, the books of type A have the advantage that learners can systematically learn the entire grammatical structure of Chinese, and the books of type B have a practical advantage that the amount of learning is less burdensome and the contents of learning can be applied immediately depending on the subjects. Fifth, the books of type A and B also differ in the table of contents arrangement. type A mostly follows the order from words to sentences, which can lead to more systematic learning as they begin with the most basic grammar units. type B follows the opposite order or has a structure in which the two are mixed. The order that starts with sentences has the advantage of helping learners speak a variety of basic sentences just from the beginning of learning.

중국어 역사문법의 최신 연구동향 분석 – 20 12년부터 2022년까지의 『古漢語研究』와 『中國語文』을 중심으로

서지은 ( Suh Jieun ),최재영 ( Choi Jaeyoung ) 한국중국언어학회 2022 중국언어연구 Vol.- No.102

This article reviews recent research trends in Historical Grammar of Chinese based on 212 articles published in Research In Ancient Chinese Language(古汉语研究) and Studies of The Chinese Language(中国语文) from 2012 to 2022. In this field, ‘words’ are being studied more than ‘constructions’, and ‘adverbs’ are being studied the most. There are the most studies on the period of ‘Archaic Chinese’ among three periods of Ancient Chinese, that is Archaic, Middle Ancient and Modern Ancient Chinese. Diachronic research is more focused rather than synchronic research. Research methods of Historical Grammar of Chinese can be largely classified into two types: simple descriptions and theoretical interpretations, and we find more studies of the former than the latter. Theoretical interpretations studies can be subdivided into five types: (1) studies on mechanisms and motivations of grammaticalization, (2) linguistic typology based studies, (3) construction grammar theory based studies, (4) cognitive grammar theory based studies, (5) generative grammar theory based studies. Among these five types, (1) accounts for the highest proportion and (4), (5) accounts for a relatively low proportion. The article concludes by suggesting that theoretical interpretations studies should be conducted more actively, and the subjects should be more associated with Modern Chinese. There also should be a unified understanding of mechanisms and motivations of grammaticalization and the key elements should be found among these.

현대중국어 평가양상 범주 및 조동사 고찰

서지은 ( Suh Jieun ),최재영 ( Choi Jaeyoung ) 한국중국언어학회 2020 중국언어연구 Vol.0 No.91

In the field of Modern Chinese grammar, auxiliary verbs are generally divided into dynamic modality, deontic modality and epistemic modality, and auxiliary verbs derived from adjectives or with adjective usage are usually excluded from the scope of auxiliary verbs. For this reason, only a few scholars, such as Zhao Yuanren, Lu Shuxiang, Zhu Dexi, regard words followed by VP with evaluative meanings as auxiliary verbs, such as ‘zhide(值得)’, ‘pei(配)’, ‘hao(好)’, ‘nan(难)’ ‘rongyi(容易)’. This paper determines the validity of establishing evaluative modality, and investigates the scope and characteristics of evaluative modal verbs in Modern Chinese. It has come to the following conclusions: First, in the field of Western grammar, some scholars claim that the evaluative meaning has not ‘irrealis’ feature, so evaluative modality should be excluded from the category or typical category of modality. However, Our research has shown that words meaning evaluative with ‘irrealis’ feature do exist both in Chinese and English, so such claims are not convincing enough. Second, according to the criteria for distinguishing auxiliary verbs from adjectives, ‘hao(好)’, ‘nan(难)’ ‘rongyi(容易)’ should be classified as auxiliary verbs. Moreover, cross-language studies showed that there are auxiliary verbs derived from adjectives in many languages. Third, evaluative modal verbs can be divided into five categories: ‘worth’, ‘sufficient’, ‘proficient’, ‘appropriate’, ‘tough-easy’. There are 20 members of evaluative modal verbs: ‘zhide(值得)’, ‘pei(配)’, ‘keyi(可以)’, ‘gou(够)’, ‘zugou(足够)’, ‘zuyi(足以)’, ‘shanyu(善于)’, ‘hui(会)’, ‘neng(能)’, ‘shiyu(适合)’, ‘shiyi(适宜)’, ‘shiyu(适于)’, ‘yiyu(宜于)’, ‘hao(好)’, ‘nan(难)’, ‘nanyi(难以)’, ‘nanyu(难于)’, ‘rongyi (容易)’, ‘yiyu(易于)’, ‘bianyu(便于)’. Fourth, evaluative modal verbs have distinctive features in the thematic role of ‘NP’ and the form of ‘VP’. There are eight members of modal verbs taking ‘NP’ as patient and ‘VP’ as ‘Vt’ the most, those are ‘zhide(值得)’, ‘keyi(可以)’, ‘nan(难)’, ‘nanyu(难于)’, ‘hao(好)’, ‘rongyi(容易)’, ‘yiyu(易于)’, ‘bianyu(便于)’. ‘neng(能)’ also takes ‘VP’ as ‘Vt’ the most, but the most common ‘NP’ of it is agent. Fifth, there are six members taking ‘NP’ as agent and ‘VP’ as ‘VO’ the most, those are ‘pei(配)’, ‘zugou(足够)’, ‘zuyi(足以)’, ‘nanyi(难以)’, ‘shanyu(善于)’, ‘hui (会)’. The rest of the members also take ‘VP’ as ‘VO’ the most, but they are different in terms of the thematic role of ‘NP’. ‘gou(够)’, ‘shiyu(适于)’ take ‘NP’ as instrument the most, ‘shiyu(适合)’, ‘shiyi(适宜)’ take ‘NP’ as time·location the most, ‘yiyu(宜于)’ takes ‘NP’ as patient the most.

교육적 활용을 위한 난이도 양상조동사 ‘不好, 难, 难以, 难于’의 용법 고찰 — ‘NP+X+VP’의 구조를 중심으로 —

서지은(Suh, JiEun),최재영(Choi, JaeYoung) 한국중국어교육학회 2021 중국어교육과연구 Vol.- No.33

In this paper, we have analyzed the usage of tough modal verbs ‘不好’, ‘难’, ‘难以’, ‘难于’ based on corpus analysis. We have learned that the current learners dictionaries failed to provide comprehensive interpretation on the usage of tough modal verbs, for which alternative and more detailed interpretations were proposed in this paper. The followings are the problems that we found: 1. The lack of awareness of the word class of tough modal verbs. 2. The lack of explanation for the usage of individual tough modal verbs. 3. The lack of comparisons for the usage of tough modal verbs. Based on our corpus analysis, we have proposed more detailed and comprehensive explanations about tough modal verbs as follows: We believe it is necessary to provide comprehensive interpretation for tough modal verbs and it will be an honor if the above discussions could make any contribution to the study of evaluative modal verbs and Chinese language education.

상고중국어시기 방향동사의 비대격성에 대한 고찰―‘出’, ‘起’, ‘来’를 중심으로

서지은 ( Suh Jieun ) 한국외국어대학교 중국연구소 2024 中國硏究 Vol.98 No.-

This study examined the unaccusativity of the directional verbs ‘Chu(出)’, ‘Qi(起)’, and ‘Lai(来)’ in ancient Chinese. During this period, ‘Chu(出)’, ‘Qi(起)’, and ‘Lai(来)’ are used as both directional verbs and appearance verbs, which are unergative verbs and unaccusative verbs. ‘Chu(出)’ and ‘Lai(来)’ are more often used as directional verbs, while ‘Qi(起)’ is more often used as an appearance verb. Based on the ratio of use between intransitive and transitive constructions, ‘Chu(出)’ is a typical ergative verb, while ‘Qi(起)’ and ‘Lai(来)’ are atypical ergative verbs. In other words, ‘Qi(起)’ and ‘Lai(来)’ are closer to ‘pure’ unaccusative verbs―unaccusative verbs that are only used as intransitive verbs―rather than ergative verbs. In modern Chinese, ‘Chu(出)’ is used as ergative verb, while ‘Qi(起)’ and ‘Lai(来)’ are used as pure unaccusative verbs. This means that not only ‘Chu(出)’ but also ‘Qi(起)’ and ‘Lai(来)’ already had some of the characteristics of modern Chinese during the period of ancient Chinese. Therefore, it can be concluded that the different unaccusative uses of directional verbs in Modern Chinese began already in ancient Chinese.